- This topic has 27 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I defragged my NC10 after i installed everything on it and the report showed that there was zero fragmentation.
Later I added my 2GB Crucial RAM (which works fine btw) and did another defrag analysis. The report said it was 20+% fragmented. After I actually defragged the drive, the report still said the drive was fragmented by around 17%
I have tried this several times and constantly get the same answer, I cannot get the machine to properly defragment anymore. Anyone else noticed this anomoly
Cheers
Strider
I defragged a couple of days ago but I don’t think it was a very high percentage anyway.
I wonder if your fragmented area is the system page file which can’t be defragged while it’s in use. It could be another locked file, but 17% is quite a large amount for one locked area.
Which defrag tool do you use BTW? I’m using O&O Free Edition.
Hi Becky, I just use the windows version – which I know can be iffy at the best of times. Did you change the paging file from 1524mb when you updated the RAM, or did you leave it as it was?
I use IOBit’s free SmartDefrag – it’s faster and more informative than Windows built-in defragmenter:
http://www.iobit.com/iobitsmartdefrag.html[quote1228418596=Strider]
Hi Becky, I just use the windows version – which I know can be iffy at the best of times. Did you change the paging file from 1524mb when you updated the RAM, or did you leave it as it was?
[/quote1228418596]Oops, I forgot to mention that I haven’t upgraded my RAM. I haven’t made any adjustments to the page file size.
Whlist I have no reason to doubt your word I am struggling to understand why more RAM would cause your HDD to fragment more.
I am by no means a computer whizz so I shall watch this thread with interest
Hmm…that reminded me I hadn’t resized my own page file yet. The way I usually do it is:
-Eliminate the page file (reboot where prompted)–a Low Virtual Memory message will probably appear when you log in
-Set a custom size of 2 MB minimum, and 256 MB maximum
Windows immediately grows the PF (in my case this last time, up to 18 MB), and then only as it needs it. Maybe that’s where your fragmentation is coming from, if you didn’t delete the PF before resizing it. In any event, you’re right about the Windows defrag tool–often times I’ve had it where there are “knots” of files that just won’t defragment.
I happen to use Defraggler myself. It’s made by the same inspired folks who brought us CCleaner, and it usually does a pretty good job.
[quote1228421908=WilliamYZF]
Whlist I have no reason to doubt your word I am struggling to understand why more RAM would cause your HDD to fragment more.I am by no means a computer whizz so I shall watch this thread with interest
[/quote1228421908]I too do not understand why doubling the RAM would cause my HD to be more fragmented. All I know is that I have tried tried it twice using a new installation of windows and it did it both times. I am holding off adding more RAM to my new black machine until I can work out what is happening.
Cheers
S
I too am not an “expert” but I also can’t see the connection – out of curiosity I’ll check mine (post 2gb too) when I’m on it next. Surely it must be something else? I’ll post back when I check (am on desktop atm!)
Cheers Jez, it will be good to see if someone else has the same problem. The only thing I cam think of is that changing the size of the page file is confusing the defragmenting s/ware
this is an interesting one…
when you insert a new stick of ram (of a different size than the last dtected by windows) it automatically changes your page file size to match the new detected size. this may have been the initial source of your fragmentation.
the solution to that of course would be delete the PF and defrag again.
i’m curious as to why you opted to set the PF to a lowly 2mb only to have windows autoset it again when you should probably infact just disable it since in reality it is a useless feature on most systems with more than 1gb of ram. the feature was originally added to winodws as a solution to the high cost of physical memory in the early days of xp in order that items of data stored in ram but not used often (such as networking services and other background bits and bobs not used regularly) are stored to disk freeing memory for other apps but since system memory sizes have grown due to the fall in cost and rise in capacity and speed of physical memory chips it’s actually a hinderance to system performance to have this enabled now.
you should also remember that windows default defrag utility avoids defragging certain files because it recognises them as “system” files. this may be the source of your fragmentation as if these get messed up inbetween non-fragged files and you are using windows defrag utility, your stuck.i recommend;
– ditch PF altogether.
– try out auslogics free disk defrag utility (youll find it on google), it’s considerably better than dfrg32 and faster as it allows you to specify how much cpu it uses during the process.once you’ve done that let us know how it performs.
I will d/l the Auslogics software tomorrow, remove the pf and add the 2gb ram module to my new Sammy NC10.
Cheers for the advice Hef
no worries man.
that’s the first time i’ve heard of such a problem though so i’m looking forward to hearing how you get on.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.