perfect disk updAate

Discussion in 'Windows Desktop Systems' started by Perris Calderon, Jan 7, 2005.

  1. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    it's a bug fix on the 7, and it's a good one...if you haven't updated to the seven, it is really worth it...if you're allready on the 7, go get this fix
     
  2. ming

    ming OSNN Advanced

    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    UK
    I think I'm still asleep. Thought you said the update is a bug. :p
    I updated last night. What does it exactly fix?
     
  3. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    it stops and endless loop on a particular fragmentation which slowed it down at times
     
  4. Electronic Punk

    Electronic Punk Administrator Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    18,590
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    ah cool :)
    think I have experienced that!
     
  5. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    change lof;

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Yes,
    a.. Scheduled boot time defragmentation override flags were ignored. This
    has been fixed.
    b.. Group Policy scheduled boot time defragmentation sometimes failed on
    NTFS drives. This has been fixed.
    c.. PerfectDisk failed to run on dual CPU systems where the CPUs were
    different. This has been fixed.
    d.. Certain sparse files were not defragmented on Win2003/XP. Depending on
    the file, PerfectDisk could go into an infinite loop, or just skip the file
    after many failed attempts. This has been fixed.
    e.. Fixed a bug when converting PerfectDisk 6.0 schedules to PerfectDisk
    7.0 schedules during an upgrade. If the v6.0 schedule contained a drive
    which did not physically exist, the migration to v7.0 created an unusable
    schedule.
    f.. Corrected some column resize issues in the GUI
    g.. Corrected the recommendation for "Pagefile". Build 31 always displayed
    a yellow WARNING dot for the pagefile.
    h.. Fixed bug where percent defragmented could exceed 100% on an empty
    drive.
     
  6. Electronic Punk

    Electronic Punk Administrator Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    18,590
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    yeah, snagged it from raxco ;D
     
  7. 2z

    2z OSNN Gamer

    Messages:
    2,439
    Location:
    England
    so .......... it was buggy after all

    typical

    q[^_^]p
     
  8. Electronic Punk

    Electronic Punk Administrator Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    18,590
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    I am pretty sure I saw that in action, same file defragged many times, then will still show as fragmented. Could be wrong tho - maybe the file was in use by a process - that kind of thing.
     
  9. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    ya, it picks a file on my box and won't let go of it, then it can't defrag it anyway.

    even with this fix, the app just skips those files sooner, instead of trying so hard.

    2z, I still love this app...I change the file placement protocol...(the amount of time before the app conciders files recent, older or old.

    that keeps the app from shuffling around my hardrive, but it still consolodates free space.

    it also has a setting to forgo aggressive file placement.

    give the seven a go, but change the file placement protocol...I think you'll like it then
     
  10. 2z

    2z OSNN Gamer

    Messages:
    2,439
    Location:
    England
    ya I tried 7 as soon as it was released
    hoping the bugs from 6 had been fixed
    bleh ......... no such luck

    DK still reports fragments PD chooses to ignore

    " smart file place placement " > still makes me giggle LOL
    files U dont use R @ the front
    files used a lot R @ the back = quicker defrag but slower access
    good for PD > bad for the user

    hmmmmm that is smart ... LOL

    wot would be smart .........
    files laid linear in order of read requests
    most frequently used @ the front of the drive

    pokes perris ........ over to you m8

    :laugh:
     
  11. ming

    ming OSNN Advanced

    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    UK
    Well, Norton SpeedDisk allows you to configure how you want to lay out the files when you defrag. I'm not sure if they have changed this or not since I haven't used it since I moved over to WinXP. I think PD and DK should add this to their products.
     
  12. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    I happen to agree. (somewhat)

    while on a normally populated disk, the best "placement" would be in the center of where the most used data allready is...this is because seek time dominates transfer time when concidering performance

    on the other hand, if you are going to be shuffling around files, then put the most used data where the transfer speed is the best, and you'll get the best of both worlds, best seek time with best transfer time,

    by the way, this wouldn't be quite at the beginning of the disk because of arm stops...it would be about 10% in

    perfect disk assumes new data is going to be often used, and the disk will eventually become well populated...therefore, other often used data should wind up about the middle, and that's where it puts the majority of the rest of the often used data

    not a bad thought if you aren't going to defrag on a regular basis...this app is designed for best practicle use...the disk should become less fragmented over time s well

    got to go to work