perfect disk updAate

Perris Calderon

dealer
Staff member
Political Access
Joined
24 Jan 2002
Messages
12,388
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
 
I think I'm still asleep. Thought you said the update is a bug. :p
I updated last night. What does it exactly fix?
 
it stops and endless loop on a particular fragmentation which slowed it down at times
 
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.
 
perris said:
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.

so .......... it was buggy after all

typical

q[^_^]p
 
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.
 
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
 
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:
 
2z said:
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:

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.
 
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
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest profile posts

Also Hi EP and people. I found this place again while looking through a oooollllllldddd backup. I have filled over 10TB and was looking at my collection of antiques. Any bids on the 500Mhz Win 95 fix?
Any of the SP crew still out there?
Xie wrote on Electronic Punk's profile.
Impressed you have kept this alive this long EP! So many sites have come and gone. :(

Just did some crude math and I apparently joined almost 18yrs ago, how is that possible???
hello peeps... is been some time since i last came here.
Electronic Punk wrote on Sazar's profile.
Rest in peace my friend, been trying to find you and finally did in the worst way imaginable.

Forum statistics

Threads
62,015
Messages
673,494
Members
5,621
Latest member
naeemsafi
Back