Search Results

Search found 65 results on 3 pages for 'defragment'.

Page 2/3 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3  | Next Page >

  • what damage can be caused if scandisk is not run before defrag

    - by Justin Gregoire
    Hello, I would like to know what the damage to a drive can be if a scandisk is not performed before a disk defrag. I have looked up some sites that say a scandisk should be run to correct any issues that may be apparent on the system, making sure that the drive is free of errors before a disk defrag is done. I have to perform a defrag on a computer without having physical access to it (using remote connection). I know that the scandisk requires a reboot to the system (causing me to lose my connection) which would be difficult to restart physically if the system does not come back on by itself once rebooted (this has happened before). Any suggestions? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Unable to use BootCamp to Install Windows 7 on my Macbook Pro

    - by Sheehan Alam
    I get the error: cannot complete the partitioning because some files cannot be moved. I have more than enough space (250GB harddrive, 150GB free) I have tried doing a full defrag with iDefrag I don't want to reformat my drive I have tried partitioning in safe mode I have repaired all Disk Permissions using Disk Utility Any suggestions? NOTE: I am installing Windows 7 64-bit I am trying to create a 32GB partition

    Read the article

  • Filesystem fragmentation on the level of set of files

    - by trismarck
    The file is stored in blocks by the file system. The block is the smallest amount of data the file system can assign to store a file. The classical definition of a fragmented file is that the file is stored in blocks that are 'scattered' (that are physically non-contiguous) around the hard drive. What I want to ask about is this second type of fragmentation I've came up with. Lets suppose we install a program. This program has very many files. When the program starts, the program always loads the contents of those files sequentially. Now, even if the hard disk is defragmented, there is still a possibility that the files (but not the blocks building up to files) will be scattered on the disk and thus the program launch time will be longer. Actually, this time could be longer due to defragmentation of the disk, as the defragmentation process not only glues fragmented files but also moves some files to optimize free space chunks. The questions: is the type of fragmentation I mentioned relevant for the file system? is it possible to remedy this kind of fragmentation and if yes, how would you do it? Also, I'm not sure if this question should belong to superuser or to serverfault (as I guess the filesystem fragmentation is more important in the server environment).

    Read the article

  • Moving data to lower sectors on an SSD without defragging

    - by David Freitag
    I bought an Intel SSD drive a while back and now I want to dual-boot with it. But for some reason there are sectors near the end of the drive filled and I can’t seem to find a way to remove the data so that I can safely shrink the partition. I know I have sectors near the end full because I am using Defraggler to analyze my drive (not to defrag it). I can see what files need to be moved/deleted but short of actually deleting some drivers and/or other necessary files, I am completely stuck. This the diskmap: I am only able to shave off that last 1.72GB of space from the drive which isn’t even enough for the most minimal Linux install.

    Read the article

  • What are the A0xxxxxx.DLL files?

    - by Joel Coehoorn
    If you've ever watched a windows computer defrag a drive, you might have noticed that many of the files that are fragmented and need fixed have names like A0833773.DLL. If you know regular expressions, I could express the filename this way: A\d{7}[.]DLL Does anyone here know what those files are or what they're used for?

    Read the article

  • Does a hard drive "working hard", i.e. when defragmenting or otherwise continuously active, significantly affect a laptop's temperature?

    - by Marko
    Trying to diagnose and fix an overheating Acer 5735 laptop, running speedfan and doing general workload to try and cause the overheat conditions. I notice that windows xp is badly fragmented according to defraggler, at 58% fragmentation. So I defrag whilst watching the speedfan window, which was at the start reporting high warning style symbols for all of the sensors. After the defrag, I rebooted and ran a few programs, and even defraggler again and the sensors in speedfan all reported green i.e. not high. Wondering if there is a correlation between windows fragmentation causing the hard drive to work harder and produce more heat inside the laptop? dont want to just assume that the problems are resolved, so either speedfan is not accurate enough or fragmentation can lead to additional hard drive heat? All comments or suggestions welcome.

    Read the article

  • Is Defrag "invisible" in Windows 8?

    - by Clay Shannon
    After (buzzard's luck) installing Visual Studio 2013 RC a couple of days ago, and then Visual Studio 2013 RTM yesterday, I thought I should defrag, what with all that install/uninstall activity going on. So I mashed the Window key and typed Defrag, and up came the "Defrag" search result. I mashed the Enter key and ... nothing ... Is Defrag working behind the scenes? I see no icon on the task bar ... Is there a trick to defragging beyond what I did?

    Read the article

  • What Is Disk Fragmentation and Do I Still Need to Defragment?

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Do modern computers still need the kind of routine defragmentation procedures that older computers called for? Read on to learn about fragmentation and what modern operating systems and file systems do to minimize performance impacts. Today’s Question & Answer session comes to us courtesy of SuperUser—a subdivision of Stack Exchange, a community-drive grouping of Q&A web sites. Secure Yourself by Using Two-Step Verification on These 16 Web Services How to Fix a Stuck Pixel on an LCD Monitor How to Factory Reset Your Android Phone or Tablet When It Won’t Boot

    Read the article

  • Why can't I defragment my SQL 2008 .mdf file?

    - by LesterDove
    I am defragmenting a badly (95%) fragmented drive upon which large (35 gig) SQL Server 2008 .mdf files live. After defragmenting and viewing the exception report, I see that the production .mdf file that I'm most interested in could not be defragmented. I initially figured it was because MSSQL had an exclusive lock on the file, so I detached it and tried again. No luck - this particular .mdf file could not be defragmented. What am I missing? Most online references suggest that I should be able to file defrag an .mdf A note: yes, I'm talking about file defragmentation, not index defrag, which is already being done routinely, and which I'll re-run after this. Thanks! What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Defragmenting the registry

    - by team-ferrari22
    Hi All, Does any body know how to defragment windows registry. We googled and found several free tools doing the same.But no tool is having open source. One tool is there - 'UltraDefrag' which is open source tool written in 'C' for file defragmentation. Please provide help in searching open source/ sample code to defragment windows registry...or any windows API functions or libraries for doing the same. Regards.

    Read the article

  • No Rush, Defragging that Drive can Wait [Humorous Image]

    - by Asian Angel
    That drive is only fragmented a little bit…nothing to worry about there. View a Larger Version of the Image You should defragment this volume. Ya think?! [via Fail Desk] What’s the Difference Between Sleep and Hibernate in Windows? Screenshot Tour: XBMC 11 Eden Rocks Improved iOS Support, AirPlay, and Even a Custom XBMC OS How To Be Your Own Personal Clone Army (With a Little Photoshop)

    Read the article

  • Exceptional PowerShell DBA Pt 3 - Collation and Fragmentation

    In this final look into his everyday essentials, Laerte Junior provides some useful scripts for the DBA that use an alternative way of error-logging. He shows how to use a PowerShell script to check and, if necessary, to defragment your indexes, write data to a SQL Server table, and change the collation for a table. Being an exceptional DBA just got a little easier.

    Read the article

  • 10 Windows Tweaking Myths Debunked

    - by Chris Hoffman
    Windows is big, complicated, and misunderstood. You’ll still stumble across bad advice from time to time when browsing the web. These Windows tweaking, performance, and system maintenance tips are mostly just useless, but some are actively harmful. Luckily, most of these myths have been stomped out on mainstream sites and forums. However, if you start searching the web, you’ll still find websites that recommend you do these things. Erase Cache Files Regularly to Speed Things Up You can free up disk space by running an application like CCleaner, another temporary-file-cleaning utility, or even the Windows Disk Cleanup tool. In some cases, you may even see an old computer speed up when you erase a large amount of useless files. However, running CCleaner or similar utilities every day to erase your browser’s cache won’t actually speed things up. It will slow down your web browsing as your web browser is forced to redownload the files all over again, and reconstruct the cache you regularly delete. If you’ve installed CCleaner or a similar program and run it every day with the default settings, you’re actually slowing down your web browsing. Consider at least preventing the program from wiping out your web browser cache. Enable ReadyBoost to Speed Up Modern PCs Windows still prompts you to enable ReadyBoost when you insert a USB stick or memory card. On modern computers, this is completely pointless — ReadyBoost won’t actually speed up your computer if you have at least 1 GB of RAM. If you have a very old computer with a tiny amount of RAM — think 512 MB — ReadyBoost may help a bit. Otherwise, don’t bother. Open the Disk Defragmenter and Manually Defragment On Windows 98, users had to manually open the defragmentation tool and run it, ensuring no other applications were using the hard drive while it did its work. Modern versions of Windows are capable of defragmenting your file system while other programs are using it, and they automatically defragment your disks for you. If you’re still opening the Disk Defragmenter every week and clicking the Defragment button, you don’t need to do this — Windows is doing it for you unless you’ve told it not to run on a schedule. Modern computers with solid-state drives don’t have to be defragmented at all. Disable Your Pagefile to Increase Performance When Windows runs out of empty space in RAM, it swaps out data from memory to a pagefile on your hard disk. If a computer doesn’t have much memory and it’s running slow, it’s probably moving data to the pagefile or reading data from it. Some Windows geeks seem to think that the pagefile is bad for system performance and disable it completely. The argument seems to be that Windows can’t be trusted to manage a pagefile and won’t use it intelligently, so the pagefile needs to be removed. As long as you have enough RAM, it’s true that you can get by without a pagefile. However, if you do have enough RAM, Windows will only use the pagefile rarely anyway. Tests have found that disabling the pagefile offers no performance benefit. Enable CPU Cores in MSConfig Some websites claim that Windows may not be using all of your CPU cores or that you can speed up your boot time by increasing the amount of cores used during boot. They direct you to the MSConfig application, where you can indeed select an option that appears to increase the amount of cores used. In reality, Windows always uses the maximum amount of processor cores your CPU has. (Technically, only one core is used at the beginning of the boot process, but the additional cores are quickly activated.) Leave this option unchecked. It’s just a debugging option that allows you to set a maximum number of cores, so it would be useful if you wanted to force Windows to only use a single core on a multi-core system — but all it can do is restrict the amount of cores used. Clean Your Prefetch To Increase Startup Speed Windows watches the programs you run and creates .pf files in its Prefetch folder for them. The Prefetch feature works as a sort of cache — when you open an application, Windows checks the Prefetch folder, looks at the application’s .pf file (if it exists), and uses that as a guide to start preloading data that the application will use. This helps your applications start faster. Some Windows geeks have misunderstood this feature. They believe that Windows loads these files at boot, so your boot time will slow down due to Windows preloading the data specified in the .pf files. They also argue you’ll build up useless files as you uninstall programs and .pf files will be left over. In reality, Windows only loads the data in these .pf files when you launch the associated application and only stores .pf files for the 128 most recently launched programs. If you were to regularly clean out the Prefetch folder, not only would programs take longer to open because they won’t be preloaded, Windows will have to waste time recreating all the .pf files. You could also modify the PrefetchParameters setting to disable Prefetch, but there’s no reason to do that. Let Windows manage Prefetch on its own. Disable QoS To Increase Network Bandwidth Quality of Service (QoS) is a feature that allows your computer to prioritize its traffic. For example, a time-critical application like Skype could choose to use QoS and prioritize its traffic over a file-downloading program so your voice conversation would work smoothly, even while you were downloading files. Some people incorrectly believe that QoS always reserves a certain amount of bandwidth and this bandwidth is unused until you disable it. This is untrue. In reality, 100% of bandwidth is normally available to all applications unless a program chooses to use QoS. Even if a program does choose to use QoS, the reserved space will be available to other programs unless the program is actively using it. No bandwidth is ever set aside and left empty. Set DisablePagingExecutive to Make Windows Faster The DisablePagingExecutive registry setting is set to 0 by default, which allows drivers and system code to be paged to the disk. When set to 1, drivers and system code will be forced to stay resident in memory. Once again, some people believe that Windows isn’t smart enough to manage the pagefile on its own and believe that changing this option will force Windows to keep important files in memory rather than stupidly paging them out. If you have more than enough memory, changing this won’t really do anything. If you have little memory, changing this setting may force Windows to push programs you’re using to the page file rather than push unused system files there — this would slow things down. This is an option that may be helpful for debugging in some situations, not a setting to change for more performance. Process Idle Tasks to Free Memory Windows does things, such as creating scheduled system restore points, when you step away from your computer. It waits until your computer is “idle” so it won’t slow your computer and waste your time while you’re using it. Running the “Rundll32.exe advapi32.dll,ProcessIdleTasks” command forces Windows to perform all of these tasks while you’re using the computer. This is completely pointless and won’t help free memory or anything like that — all you’re doing is forcing Windows to slow your computer down while you’re using it. This command only exists so benchmarking programs can force idle tasks to run before performing benchmarks, ensuring idle tasks don’t start running and interfere with the benchmark. Delay or Disable Windows Services There’s no real reason to disable Windows services anymore. There was a time when Windows was particularly heavy and computers had little memory — think Windows Vista and those “Vista Capable” PCs Microsoft was sued over. Modern versions of Windows like Windows 7 and 8 are lighter than Windows Vista and computers have more than enough memory, so you won’t see any improvements from disabling system services included with Windows. Some people argue for not disabling services, however — they recommend setting services from “Automatic” to “Automatic (Delayed Start)”. By default, the Delayed Start option just starts services two minutes after the last “Automatic” service starts. Setting services to Delayed Start won’t really speed up your boot time, as the services will still need to start — in fact, it may lengthen the time it takes to get a usable desktop as services will still be loading two minutes after booting. Most services can load in parallel, and loading the services as early as possible will result in a better experience. The “Delayed Start” feature is primarily useful for system administrators who need to ensure a specific service starts later than another service. If you ever find a guide that recommends you set a little-known registry setting to improve performance, take a closer look — the change is probably useless. Want to actually speed up your PC? Try disabling useless startup programs that run on boot, increasing your boot time and consuming memory in the background. This is a much better tip than doing any of the above, especially considering most Windows PCs come packed to the brim with bloatware.     

    Read the article

  • Why is Windows "stuck" on the Welcome screen for so long?

    - by Perdana Putra
    I use Windows 7 with a laptop specifications processor core (Core i3), 2 GB DDR3 RAM, the remaining capacity on the system partition (25 GB). I do not know why the "welcome screen" takes a long time (about 40 sec), but yesterday only took about 10 sec., I tried to defragment the disk and do a virus & spyware scan with antivirus, but still the "Welcome screen" comes along. How do I get the welcome screen to pass by faster when Windows boots up?

    Read the article

  • HTG Explains: Why Linux Doesn’t Need Defragmenting

    - by Chris Hoffman
    If you’re a Linux user, you’ve probably heard that you don’t need to defragment your Linux file systems. You’ll also notice that Linux distributions don’t come with disk-defragmenting utilities. But why is that? To understand why Linux file systems don’t need defragmenting in normal use – and Windows ones do – you’ll need to understand why fragmentation occurs and how Linux and Windows file systems work differently from each other. HTG Explains: Why Linux Doesn’t Need Defragmenting How to Convert News Feeds to Ebooks with Calibre How To Customize Your Wallpaper with Google Image Searches, RSS Feeds, and More

    Read the article

  • HTG Explains: Do You Really Need to Defrag Your PC?

    - by The Geek
    Ask any PC tech person how to make your computer faster, and almost every one of them will tell you to defrag your PC. But do you really need to manually trigger a defrag these days? The quick answer: You don’t need to manually defragment a modern operating system. The longer answer: let’s go through a couple scenarios and explain so you can understand why you probably don’t need to defrag. HTG Explains: Do You Really Need to Defrag Your PC? Use Amazon’s Barcode Scanner to Easily Buy Anything from Your Phone How To Migrate Windows 7 to a Solid State Drive

    Read the article

  • Reconstructing data from PCAP sniff

    - by Ishi
    Hi everyone !! I am trying to sniff HTTP data through libpcap and get all the http contents (header+payload) after processing the TCP payload. As per my discussion at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2905430/writing-an-http-sniffer-or-any-other-application-level-sniffer , I am facing problems due to fragmentation - I need to reconstruct the whole stream (or defragment it) to get a complete HTTP packet, and this is where I need some help. Thanks in anticipation !!

    Read the article

  • What causes memory fragmentation in .NET

    - by Matt
    I am using Red Gates ANTS memory profiler to debug a memory leak. It keeps warning me that: Memory Fragmentation may be causing .NET to reserver too much free memory. or Memory Fragmentation is affecting the size of the largest object that can be allocated Because I have OCD, this problem must be resolved. What are some standard coding practices that help avoid memory fragmentation. Can you defragment it through some .NET methods? Would it even help?

    Read the article

  • .NET Free memory usage (how to prevent overallocation / release memory to the OS)

    - by Ronan Thibaudau
    I'm currently working on a website that makes large use of cached data to avoid roundtrips. At startup we get a "large" graph (hundreds of thouthands of different kinds of objects). Those objects are retrieved over WCF and deserialized (we use protocol buffers for serialization) I'm using redgate's memory profiler to debug memory issues (the memory didn't seem to fit with how much memory we should need "after" we're done initializing and end up with this report Now what we can gather from this report is that: 1) Most of the memory .NET allocated is free (it may have been rightfully allocated during deserialisation, but now that it's free, i'd like for it to return to the OS) 2) Memory is fragmented (which is bad, as everytime i refresh the cash i need to redo the memory hungry deserialisation process and this, in turn creates large object that may throw an OutOfMemoryException due to fragmentation) 3) I have no clue why the space is fragmented, because when i look at the large object heap, there are only 30 instances, 15 object[] are directly attached to the GC and totally unrelated to me, 1 is a char array also attached directly to the GC Heap, the remaining 15 are mine but are not the cause of this as i get the same report if i comment them out in code. So my question is, what can i do to go further with this? I'm not really sure what to look for in debugging / tools as it seems my memory is fragmented, but not by me, and huge amounts of free spaces are allocated by .net , which i can't release. Also please make sure you understand the question well before answering, i'm not looking for a way to free memory within .net (GC.Collect), but to free memory that is already free in .net , to the system as well as to defragment said memory. Note that a slow solution is fine, if it's possible to manually defragment the large heap i'd be all for it as i can call it at the end of RefreshCache and it's ok if it takes 1 or 2 second to run. Thanks for your help! A few notes i forgot: 1) The project is a .net 2.0 website, i get the same results running it in a .net 4 pool, idem if i run it in a .net 4 pool and convert it to .net 4 and recompile. 2) These are results of a release build, so debug build can not be the issue. 3) And this is probably quite important, i do not get these issues at all in the webdev server, only in IIS, in the webdev i get memory consumption rather close to my actual consumption (well more, but not 5-10X more!)

    Read the article

  • what the best and simplest way to find out whether a volume need defrag?

    - by r9r9r9
    I am writing a application that monitor the system's health, user should know when they need to defrag the volumes. What I am thinking is calling the "defrag.exe /A" then analyze the output result to see whether it contains "You do not need to defragment this volume." But it's slow and very bad, I fount that the "Analyze" is really quick on the MyDefrag.exe. Anyone could tell me what's the best and simplest way?

    Read the article

  • Should I worry about running out of HierarchyIDs?

    - by Bruno Martinez
    When you ask for a new HierarchyID between two others, the result gets progressively longer. For example, between 2/5.6 and 2/5.7 there's only 2/5.6.1 and other 4 component paths. The HierarchyID data type is limited to 800 some bytes, so you can't repeat this forever. Then again, integer types are also limited, but it isn't a problem in practice. Should I periodically defragment my table so that height doesn't grow unbounded?

    Read the article

  • How can Windows defragmentation tools cause internal fragmentation in SQL Server?

    - by Martin
    I was just reading this article where the author talks about the file system fragmentation that can be caused by growing database files. There was one bit that I didn't quite follow. What about Windows defragmentation tools? Although you can use a Windows defragmentation tool to defragment your database files, these tools simply move chunks of files around to get them contiguous. This moving of chunks of files can cause internal fragmentation that you might not be able to resolve easily. Is the author saying here that the disc defragmenter makes no attempt to put the chunks of files in the correct sequence or have I misunderstood? If he is saying that then is this a limitation of all disc defragmenter utilities - even commercial ones?

    Read the article

  • What may be the reason of "hide inactive icons" option of WinXP systray to stop working?

    - by Ivan
    Yesterday I've set up Defraggler (I've used it before many times) to defragment my hard drives and turn off my laptop when it finishes. I haven§t installed/uninstalled/reconfigured anything that day. When I've then turned the laptop on, I've got taskbar's "quick launch" area disappeared and all and every system tray (notification area) icons displayed (and the arrow-in-a-bubble usually folding to hide most of them gone). I've then successfully turned on "show quick launch" option, but "hide inactive icons" was already on. I've turned it off, applied, closed "taskbar and start menu properties", then opened again to turn the option back on, applied, restarted, nothing changes. Now I have to have all the system tray icons always displayed. Any ideas what may the reason be and how to fix? The OS is Windows XP Pro SP3 with all the updates.

    Read the article

  • Why some recovery tools are still able to find deleted files after I purge Recycle Bin, defrag the disk and zero-fill free space?

    - by Ivan
    As far as I understand, when I delete (without using Recycle Bin) a file, its record is removed from the file system table of contents (FAT/MFT/etc...) but the values of the disk sectors which were occupied by the file remain intact until these sectors are reused to write something else. When I use some sort of erased files recovery tool, it reads those sectors directly and tries to build up the original file. In this case, what I can't understand is why recovery tools are still able to find deleted files (with reduced chance of rebuilding them though) after I defragment the drive and overwrite all the free space with zeros. Can you explain this? I thought zero-overwritten deleted files can be only found by means of some special forensic lab magnetic scan hardware and those complex wiping algorithms (overwriting free space multiple times with random and non-random patterns) only make sense to prevent such a physical scan to succeed, but practically it seems that plain zero-fill is not enough to wipe all the tracks of deleted files. How can this be?

    Read the article

  • InnoDb Overhead?

    - by Rimary
    I just converted several large tables from MyISAM to InnoDB. When I view the tables in phpMyAdmin, they are showing a significant amount of overhead (One table has 6.8GB). Optimizing the tables (which isn't a supported command on InnoDB) has no affect like it does on MyISAM. Is this a result of InnoDB having the ever growing data file that never returns space even after deletes? If that's the case, I've never seen overhead like this before from other InnoDB tables. Is there a way to clean this up? Edit: Here are the things I've tried (with no success): Optimize Table Reorder table by primary key Defragment table

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3  | Next Page >