DiskKeeper vs XP Defrag vs BootVis

Discussion in 'Windows Desktop Systems' started by i_pedal, May 21, 2002.

  1. i_pedal

    i_pedal Guest

    If XP is constantly optimising programs by moving files, does using defrag undo this? What about defrag after using BootVis? And is DiskKeeper a better defrag than XP's?
    seriously confused bill
  2. Qumahlin

    Qumahlin Moderator

    Diskkeeper is just a full version of the windows defrag, they are both made by executive software.

    XP isn't really "constanly moving files" it just basically keeps track of the most used and such so that when the drive is defragged and such the files are moved closer to the beginning. thats what the layout.ini file does. using xp defrag or a full diskkeeper defrag will not undo this.
  3. i_pedal

    i_pedal Guest

    Thanks for reply.
    Ok, so what is it that BootVis does? Is it like a winalign thing?
    bill g
  4. stuy_b

    stuy_b Guest

    Bootvis tracks which files are used during bootup and the initial start of WindowsXP.

    Bootvis will then move these frequently accessed files together and as close to the start of your harddisk as possible.

    If you run Defrag AFTER running BootVis, you will undo any changes it has made.

    The best way to deal with this is to..

    1st run defragger.
    2nd run bootvis.

    Hope this clears up your queries.
  5. i_pedal

    i_pedal Guest

    Ok, thanks
    bill g
  6. ghayes

    ghayes Microsoft MVP

    "And is DiskKeeper a better defrag than XP's? "

    Just about any defragmenter is better than XP's :)

    The built-in defragmenter was built by Executive Software to Microsoft's specifications. Microsoft retains exclusive control over the functionality of the built-in defragmenter.

    The built-in one can't defragment directories on FATx partitions, requires at least 15% free space, may not consolidate free space, may require more than 1 pass, can't defragment the pagefile or hibernate file and can't defragment non-$MFT metadata on NTFS partitions.

    The commercial version (Diskeeper) has a lot of the same limitations as the built-in defragmenter: requires at least 15-20% free space, may not consolidate free space, may require more than 1 pass, can't defragment the hibernate file and can't defragment non-$MFT metadata on NTFS partitions.

    Both the built-in defragmenter and Diskeeper will "honor" the file placement done by XP approx every 3 days (layout.ini). One of the things that XP does is to monitor application launches and put this information in /windows/prefetch/layout.ini. Approx every 3 days, XP will do a "partial" defrag and attempt to make sure that the files indicated in layout.ini are contiguous (ensuring faster application launches). Unfortunately, since the built-in defragment is quite limited, it may not be able to ensure this (especially if there isn't a large enough piece of free space available for the partial defrag to use). When you perform a full defrag pass using the the built-in defragmenter, it is supposed to "honor" where these files are already placed and not move them around (Diskeeper does this as well). Some defragmenters don't honor at all (SpeedDisk, O&O Defrag, Defrag Commander, Vopt, Ontrack) and you can run into a situation where the built-in defragmenter and the above defragmenters try to "fix" what the other has done. PerfectDisk gives you the choice to have PerfectDisk manage these files (PD will make sure that they are contiguous and placed regardless of how fragmented free space is) or you can have Windows XP manage them (in which case PerfectDisk will "honor" where these files are placed by XP).
  7. i_pedal

    i_pedal Guest

    Thanks for the detail. I have been doing demos of PD and DiskKeeper and it liked PD for speed and ease of use. Sounds like it's also better at defrag.
    bill g
  8. Static 99

    Static 99 Guest

    Thanks GHayes

    You just answered my 'question', although it's not exactly what i wanted to hear. ;)

    I posted this yesterday in another thread.

    You think disabling the optimization cycle thing is a good idea, or should i just dump Speed Disk?
  9. ghayes

    ghayes Microsoft MVP

    Since SpeedDisk and XP lay files out differently, they are essentially working at odds to each other. Is this a "bad" thing? Not really - it just means more work for each to do with they run. It doesn't cause any "damage"...

    You could certainly disable XP's optimization, but you would need to ensure that SpeedDisk is running frequently to make sure that performance remains peak.

    - Greg/Raxco Software
  10. Static 99

    Static 99 Guest

    I run Speed Disk allmost every day, so i think i'm just going to disable XP's optimization, and see what happens.

    Thanks again!
  11. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    new york
    Gregg, when you get back on line at this site, could you let us know if pd's optimization is at odds with the ms file placement optimization, or if in fact it facilitates the strategy and speeds the effort.
  12. 2z

    2z OSNN Gamer

    the diskeeper site also says that a certain percentage of free space is required.

    but in practice its far from true

    I have had a 31 gig fat32 partition with less than 300meg spare
    Diskeeper defragged it no problem,

    in one pass :)

    Diskeeper always consolidates free space (unless large files are involved)
  13. ghayes

    ghayes Microsoft MVP

    How do you know how good of a job Diskeeper is doing in consolidating freespace? You really can't tell from their stats. You can kinda tell from their disk map - which isn't granular enough to tell the whole story... Are you running their Best Performance defrag or their Improved Free Space consolidation free space (interesting how they now have this option)?

    - Greg/Raxco Software
    Microsoft MVP - Windows Storage Management/File System

    Disclaimer: I work for Raxco Software, the maker of PerfectDisk - a commercial defrag utility, as a systems engineer in the support department.