Defragment advice

[ChristiaanJ]

In brief:

Antique PC with 10Gb hard disk, running XP
250Mb free disk space.
No money.... at least not until well after New Year....

No defrag for ages (didn't dare...) so a lot of stuff has slowed down, both because of the fragmentation, and too many virtual memory disk swaps.

My pertinent questions for the moment:
- What's the minimum free HD space and RAM needed for a successful defrag?
- How long would it take (0.75 GHz P-III, 128 Mb RAM), if it can be done at all? A few hours, or all night?

Answers on a postcard....

No need for the obvious answers I've already worked out...:
- dump most of the data files on CD-R (still got to get the CD-R installed, again scared of crashing everything, but I'll get it done),
- dump data files on USB "keys" (started doing that but have to buy some more),
- get another HD (been there, did that, but it was an external one that didn't like the USB 1 interface, so I'll have to get a USB 2 installed),
- get more RAM (I'll be ordering some more 'next year').

For the moment, I'm sure defrag would help, so if anybody has answers on that, they would be very gratefully received!

CJ

[Mr Grumps]

The easy bit is the space you will need is about 1.5Gb spare. Time wise, I would leave it overnight to do its thing in peace. The amount of RAM you have will just make it slower rather than prevent the defrag.

[Tarq57]

You may be able to obtain a bit more space by reducing system restore size (you'll loose some restore points) and reducing the page swap file size a bit.
JKDefrag (http://www.filehippo.com/download_jkdefrag/) is a good one, run it from the unzipped location. No install.

[frostbite]

Just done mine today (about every 6 months, if I remember!)

Used Disk Defrag - Reclaim the Speed Of Your Disks (http://www.auslogics.com/disk-defrag) for years now - it's miles better than the M$ offering and much faster. Took about 15mins. today.

[John Marsh]

Run Disk Cleanup on your HDD. (Right-click drive->Properties).

Defragmenting in Safe Mode allows more files to be defragmented.

I find XP starts to slow down if the HDD approaches 25% full.

File storage: Aria are offering a 2GB pen drive for £1.14, web purchase only.
computer hardware, components, systems and peripherals at the lowest prices from IT supplier Aria Technology (http://www.aria.co.uk)

[crewmeal]

Two questions!!

1. What is the difference with those defrag programmes mentioned above?

2. What's wrong with Microsoft defrag that comes with OS?

[stevef]

I was told by a computer tech that it's always a good idea to run an Error Check (or Scandisc on pre-XP Windows) before de-fragmenting. It only takes half an hour on XP.

[frostbite]

Agreed on running Disk Cleanup first - that could free up some much needed space.

crewmeal - Differences are many and varied in the way they carry out the job. The M$ defrag is notoriously slow and some find it never completes.

[ChristiaanJ]

Thanks to all, for all the tips and links already!

In short, no defrag for the moment, until I get rid of another 1.5Gb of files, to have at least 15% space.

Disk Clean is routine here, already... it's astonishing how 'temp' garbage accumulates very quickly.

Oh, and a dumb question... how do I start XP in Safe mode? I knew how to for Win95 and 98, but not for XP.

CJ

PS It's not that I'm a newbie... I've been through the whole gamut from ISIS-II through all the DOSes, with sidesteps into Unix et al, but the last few years, with XP, I've had so few problems (relatively), that I've had no reason to delve into the innards in the same way.

[42ongo]

Just knowledge not yet gained

to restart XP in safe mode

Power the machine off
then power up and prod the F8 key periodically
then you will be given the choice to select
Safe mode
Safe mode with command prompt
Safe mode with networking

Unless some of the other tech lads know better hopefully plain old
"safe mode" will do the job for you

Good luck

[amanoffewwords]

You might be able to free some space by removing any windows update files in the windows directory - they are hidden and usually start with $nt... downside is that you won't be abl eto fallback any patche/service packs that may have been installed since the last Windows fresh install.

defraggler (free to download and use) is able to defrag even with low space with the caveat that it won't do a perfect job and will probably be slow.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

What for?

What evidence do you have that:

(a) fragmentation is giving you some sort of problem, and:

(b) defragmenting is going to fix it?

In particular, what will you measure, before and after, in order to confirm that what you did was useful?

If the answer to all these questions is "don't know" or "some bloke I met in a pub told me to do this" or "I read it on a web site so it must be true" then I suggest you spend the time doing something more interesting instead.

[ChristiaanJ]

What for?
What evidence do you have that:
(a) fragmentation is giving you some sort of problem, and:
(b) defragmenting is going to fix it?
In particular, what will you measure, before and after, in order to confirm that what you did was useful?
If the answer to all these questions is "don't know" or "some bloke I met in a pub told me to do this" or "I read it on a web site so it must be true" then I suggest you spend the time doing something more interesting instead.Gertrude,
To answer your questions...

I've done a check of the current fragmentation on the disk, which is pretty major... I looked at the figures.
My XP talks German, so I can't give you the exact quotes (I can MP them, if that helps you for some more advice).
I've done regular defragmentation on older versions of Windows, so I know the "before and after".

Freeing up some swap space to somewhat over the limit, which I've done today, has slightly improved matters, but most applications and file accesses still rattle the HD far too much, which means they're still looking all over the place for the data, which is what a full defrag would certainly improve.
So I would "measure" it by less HD rattle, faster file access, and suchlike.

As to doing something more interesting...
Yes, once I've got some money coming in, I'll get the CD-R installed, see if I can get the dud external HD installed inside, get an USB 2.0 card, get more RAM, and so on and so forth.
Until then, I'm just trying to get a bit more joy out of my current heap.

Thanks for trying to help in your way. As I said already, I'm an oldie, so fairly familiar with what's going on, and not relying on a friend at the pub. As a matter of fact, some of the replies on here have already been useful, and I hope for some more.

I still regret my old Win3.11 machine. 100MHz Pentium, 1Gb hard disk with two entirely separate 500Mb partitions. Far faster than any of the current ****, both for start-up and for loading applications and files. Sadly, there was no way to get a broadband modem with a Win3.11 driver, so I had to upgrade... what do I say... downgrade ... to the next generation.

CJ

[Saab Dastard]

CJ,

I know what you mean - OS and application bloatware expands to fill the cpu cycles, RAM and HD improvements.

Still, the single most important addition you can make is to add RAM. Actually I'm surprised you get a usable XP system at all with 128MB!

SD

[ChristiaanJ]

CJ,
I know what you mean - OS and application bloatware expands to fill the cpu cycles, RAM and HD improvements.I don't really want to go off-topic here, since so much the advice is useful.
But you're right.... there should be a corollary to Moore's law... "Windows software always bloats faster than CPU/RAM/HD capacity, hence Windows has slowed down PCs ever since its introduction". Would be a good discussion on JetBlast, no?

Still, the single most important addition you can make is to add RAM. Actually I'm surprised you get a usable XP system at all with 128MB!
It works, but you're right.
Getting some more RAM, up to the physical limit, should eliminate most, if not all, of the "Not enough virtual memory" messages I do get, and should cut down on the HD accesses.

So maybe that should be the first priority?
OK... Dell Optiplex GX110. 128M of RAM actually. Seems that Kingston is a good address for more RAM, but open to any other good ideas?

CJ

[frostbite]

7dayshop.com were/are having a sale with RAM at very good prices.

They even have a finder on their website, so just enter the make/model and it should identify the correct package for you.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

I've done a check of the current fragmentation on the disk, which is pretty major... I looked at the figures.
So what? Why do you care what some fragmentation number is? What real world parameter do you measure that makes a real world difference to your use of the machine?

[Bushfiva]

Christiaanj, a third-party utility such as Dirms may not need 15% of disk space free. It's a little command-line program. Buzzsaw also works OK in tight spaces.

[capewrath]

crewmeal wrote:-

"Two questions!!

1. What is the difference with those defrag programmes mentioned above?

2. What's wrong with Microsoft defrag that comes with OS?"

Nowt wrong with MS defrag, as such.
Cannot speak for Vista, but XP defrag is a slimmed down version of "Diskeeper" by Diskeeper Corporation.
That program has a few more facilities, but it's main feature is that defrag is ongoing continuously during the times that you are not actually doing anything on your pc. As soon as you start to work it pauses until you stop.
The result is that your hard drive only ever gets "slightly" defragged.
I have my drive partitioned with the main drive - C (containing the OS and most programs) - being 30GB.
If I were to go now and do a manual defrag of C with Diskeeper it would take just a few seconds because so little defragging is needed due to the ongoing maintemance.