Order by accessed date, please

[Mike Yates]

If older files, which are less likely to get extended, are placed near the start of the volume (top in the display) then the next defrag will be due later and take less time because the static files form a block at the start.

When files are selected (automatically) to fill gaps, the oldest should be preferred. Perhaps you do this already but I don't see much evidence of it. Perhaps the priorities should be selectable in the Settings menu?

The most successful re-orderer was "dog" or Disc Organiser of 1987, which was sadly never updated for FAT32, never mind NTFS! It was very fast and effective, using innovative algorithms - much quicker than Norton SpeedDisk, which didn't bother re-ordering.

[HSchulze]

Long-time-ago (LTO) accessed files and LTO written files should be thrown to end of drive, to save re-defragmenting, and speed up access to newer files at the beginning and middle of the drive.

I watched Norton SD for many hours trying to divine what it was up to.  it was a Great Thing in the days of DOS.

The various things that people want out of their defrag performance should be weighted, based on their priorities 

[nukecad]

This is an old thread.

Please check the date of the last post on a thread before replying.

This old thread has now been locked.