429 replies to this topic

[StuartUK]

Had a go with 1.1.44 (BETA) and it seems to work fine. The ability to defragment a single, large file is potentially useful.

Couple of suggestions:

At the moment it can take a long time to respond to the [Stop] command. If it is working on a big file, it seems to complete it before stopping - which can take some time (minutes in some cases). Windows defrag always stops instantly. It would be nice if Defraggler also responded straight away - presumably leaving the file it was working on in whatever semi-defragmented state it had got to.

Another option that would be useful would be to bring all the free space together into one block after the files have been defragmented (Windows defrag calls it  "compacting"). Otherwise, if you are short on free space and that free space is itself fragmented, then the next  time you create a largish file, it will be fragmented right from the start.

Thanks
Stuart

[adchia]

it seems to stop instantly for me....

unless I'm processing a large file. But then, windows disk defragmenter also has a delay before stopping...

[MrRon]

We're currently looking at improving the stopping speed for larger files and hope to include a fix for this in the next release.


MrRon

[thm]

StuartUK, on Jan 18 2008, 10:09 AM, said:

Another option that would be useful would be to bring all the free space together into one block after the files have been defragmented (Windows defrag calls it  "compacting"). Otherwise, if you are short on free space and that free space is itself fragmented, then the next  time you create a largish file, it will be fragmented right from the start.

Thanks
Stuart

--I think you will find that if you defrag the drive (right-click on drive name)
then Defraggler will attempt to defrag the freespace after it has defragged
the files.  It's not perfect and sometimes takes a couple of goes, but it is
reasonably effective and a good compromise between speed and completeness.

- thm

[DGMurdockIII]

why not uses a open source defrag program as a bases for Defraggler instead of starting from scratch here are a few ones you could look at if you want to do that

jkdefrag - http://www.kessels.com/JkDefrag/

UltraDefrag - http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/

[Garr3tt]

another suggestion would be to show the file being defragged on the bar situated at the bottom of the screen.... and an all time favorite, and performance must have, pagefile (be it offline or not) defrag  

thanks
yours trully, Garrett

Edit: also moderators it would be great if u could please make this topic pined so that everyone could post their sugestions or feature reqsts in one place

[hairbautt]

Have any of ya'll tried UltimateDefrag? Unfortunately it is not free, but one of the features is the ability to "archive" files to the center core of the HD (where it is slowest) and prioritize commonly used applications like games or the Windows directory to the outer core (where it is fastest).

Been using it for awhile and it seems to be a nice feature, so why not include it?

[CTskifreak]

I think your theory is reversed. Doesn't it take less time to seek data if it store on a ring/layer that is closer to the center? The circumference (the edge of a circle) is smaller the closer you are - C=2(pi)r. Smaller radii would be closer to the center. 1 cm vs 5 cm.

AJ

[thm]

Here is a very simple [but hopefully useful suggestion]...

It would be good to have two Defrag buttons, for example
"Defrag Selected"
"Defrag All Files"

...the "Defrag Selected" button would act as the "Defrag" button
does now, but the "Defrag All Files" button would effectively
select all files and launch a defrag in one click.  Call me lazy,
but after effecting an analysis I would prefer not to have to
go over to select all files and then back to the existing Defrag button.

Maybe an even simpler thing to do would be to select all fragmented
files by default after an analysis.  After all, if you don't want to do this
you would have to click around on those files that you do want to defrag,
(so one more click to deselect the "all" box wouldn't make much difference)
but it would make things a bit slicker for those that usually want to defrag
them all !

Opinions ??

-thm

[thm]

Further to my earlier post (of a few minutes ago), here is another
suggestion as a possible alternative...

1) Leave the "Defrag" button as it is, but...

2) Change the right-click context menu on a drive to replace the current
    "Defrag Drive" [which currently defrags files and freespace] with
    three entries: "Defrag Files" [which would just do all the files],
    "Defrag Freespace" [which would just compact the freespace], and
    "Defrag Files + Freespace"

Would this be a better suggestion to my previous one ??

-thm

[wout000]

Scheduler, or screensaver option would be nice

[hairbautt]

CTskifreak, on Jan 23 2008, 07:42 PM, said:

I think your theory is reversed. Doesn't it take less time to seek data if it store on a ring/layer that is closer to the center? The circumference (the edge of a circle) is smaller the closer you are - C=2(pi)r. Smaller radii would be closer to the center. 1 cm vs 5 cm.

AJ

It does seem like it would be reverse, but:

DiskTrix Site said:

If item 1 improves performance by 20%, Item 2 is improved by 50% and item 3 by 50% then the sum overall improvement is (1.20 x 1.50 x 1.50)-1 = 170%. Hard drive performance gain in this instance is 170%. The reality is that item 2 (access times) can actually be improved by well over 100% i.e. access times can be more than halved. If we run the equation again (1.20 X 2.00 X 1.50)-1 = 260%. This is actually worst case. We believe that average access times can be improved by 300% or more by the seek confinement achieved by "archiving" unused data to the inner tracks of your drive. if you punch 300% into the equation - overall performance gain is 440%.

http://www.disktrix.com/UDFaqs.htmI use the program and that's where my "archived" files are located.

Here's what I was talking 'bout in more detail.

DiskTrix Site said:

Strategic File Placement Gives You Complete Control Over Which Files And Programs You Want Increased Performance From
Accelerate the performance of your favorite games, simulations and applications. UltimateDefrag lets you do it. Select individual programs or file types. e.g. Place your .exe and .dll files to the high performing areas of your hard drive and watch all your programs launch with amazing speed.

http://www.disktrix....Description.htm

[JDPower]

CTskifreak, on Jan 24 2008, 12:42 AM, said:

I think your theory is reversed. Doesn't it take less time to seek data if it store on a ring/layer that is closer to the center? The circumference (the edge of a circle) is smaller the closer you are - C=2(pi)r. Smaller radii would be closer to the center. 1 cm vs 5 cm.

AJ

Yes but the disk head has to move further to the centre of the disk giving a slower read time. The fastest part of the disk is the outer edge.

[CTskifreak]

It still doesn't make sense to me....the drive head is moving ridiculously fast anyway, isn't it? Wouldn't it be only, at worst, tenths of a second difference?

LOL...screw normal harddrives - Solid State Drives ftw!

AJ

[JDPower]

CTskifreak, on Jan 24 2008, 10:09 PM, said:

It still doesn't make sense to me....the drive head is moving ridiculously fast anyway, isn't it? Wouldn't it be only, at worst, tenths of a second difference?

Yes but we are only talking milliseconds anyway.

[Robin Hood]

thm, on Jan 22 2008, 02:52 PM, said:

--I think you will find that if you defrag the drive (right-click on drive name)
then Defraggler will attempt to defrag the freespace after it has defragged
the files.  It's not perfect and sometimes takes a couple of goes, but it is
reasonably effective and a good compromise between speed and completeness.

- thm

Uh?..Ive never seen Defraggler after right-clicking on a drive...Am i missing something here?

[thm]

Robin Hood, on Jan 25 2008, 04:58 AM, said:

Uh?..Ive never seen Defraggler after right-clicking on a drive...Am i missing something here?

...Ah...perhaps I wasn't very clear: you need to right-click on the drive's
name in the Defraggler window to get to this context menu.

The attached screenshot should make this unambiguous...

-thm

Attached Files

•  Where_to_Right_Click.zip   21.89K   40 downloads

[WindHydra]

CTskifreak, on Jan 24 2008, 02:09 PM, said:

It still doesn't make sense to me....the drive head is moving ridiculously fast anyway, isn't it? Wouldn't it be only, at worst, tenths of a second difference?

LOL...screw normal harddrives - Solid State Drives ftw!

AJ

The speed is probably noticeable if you are reading/writing large, continuous file.  Since the disk is spinning at a constant speed, one revolution covers several times more distance at the edge of the disk than at the center, so the read/write speed is a lot higher at the edge.

[malikor]

Auto-Update Feature: Just like CCleaner has, that way it is easier to keep up-to-date. Also, make options in a feature to let you know if the update is Beta or a Major Release.

Portable Version: Just like CCleaner has so that when the program is installed, there is nothing left on the host computer, including an association that lists the program in the Add/Remove Programs list.

Registry Defrag: Add an item in the list that shows the drives to defrag that lets you also defrag the registry upon reboot. Also add an option to automatically defrag the registry and auto-reboot after defragmentation of the selected drive is complete.

Perhaps add options to do one of the following once defrag of the current drive is complete:
- Close Program
- Log Off User
- Shut Down
- Restart

And make it possible to queue other drives for defrag. For example, I could set it to defrag my internal hard drive first. Once complete, begin defrag of my external hard drive, then defrag my USB drive.

Add a feature to run a scheduled defrag every day, week or month. I know this is possible thru a feature already included in Windows but integration of the scheduling feature would be nice.

[dusty2008]

Since this is a BETA software program and touching the REGISTY is almost blasphemy, LOL, is it really wise for us to be using a BETA program on our delicate and sancorsant registries?      

I just wonder about the logic and wisdom of such an act.  No offense or disrespect intended as I love PIRIFORM immensely, truly.