Jump to content
Piriform Community Forums

GLykos

Members
  • Content count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About GLykos

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. Install cc545 on top of existing cc544 where Enable system monitoring and Enable Active Monitoring are not selected. Then running cc545, icon now appears in System tray: Enable System monitoring is not checked and Enable Active Monitoring is checked. Uncheck EAM, but am unable to close System tray icon, and on next restart (because there's no simple way to kill cc545), cc545 reappears in the tray with Esm not checked and EAM checked. Seems there was a similar problem with cc544, but at least there, you could on the Options page select Esm, then deselect both Esm and EAM and it would stick. C'mon, guys and gals... Dell E6400 laptop, Win 7 32-bit. Thanks, and best regards, George
  2. What is it doing?

    Further to above, the following is a log file that accompanies screen captures for each pass component graphically illustrating the descriptions, some dozen files in all. I attempted to upload them here but after the first two the forum page stopped working. They are ~120KB each, and the forum page says total allowed file size is 1.7MB. If someone at Piriform wishes to contact me by e-mail, I can zip the set and send them as an attachment. There definitely appear to be basic and repeatable issues with Defraggler, and the data set is offered as a contribution by an interested user in your community if/as helpful. ___________________________________________ Defraggler 2.22.995, Win 7 32-bit, Garmin Nuvi 2460 successive passes: 1. Fresh program start, run to done, direct. 2a. Rerun same drive in progress from 1. drive state - collapsing all. 2b. Rerun same drive still in progress - expanding out. 2c. Rerun same drive still in progress - collapsing all. 2d. Rerun same drive still in progress, expanding out. Clicked "Stop" to interrupt, status transitioned to "Defrag Complete" (not aborted). 3a. Fresh program start from 2d. drive state. 3b. Run same drive still in progress - collapsing all. 3c. Run same drive still in progress, expanding out. Clicked "Stop" to interrupt, status transitioned to "Defrag Complete" (not aborted). Notes: 1. Nuvi is in off-line mode, allowing external dedicated access by PC via USB to device file system - foreground device functions not active that I know. 2. I did not clock event durations. 3. I was expecting that pass 3 was going to run to successful conclusion after restarting Defraggler. It did not, but rather went back into some kind of loop. 4. I realize after demand-stopping the defrag operation, the Status is Defrag Complete. Is the exit status the same regardless whether the defrag operation completes successfully or is terminated early (read: aborted) by the user?? 5. The Nuvi was chkdsk'd and no problems were reported. ___________________________________________ Regards, George
  3. This is to "move" the captioned posting from the general Defraggler forum to this one. Reported issues are as follows: 1) Sequential defragmenting results in distorted pattern on second drive. When the operation is repeated on the second drive directly, the defragmentation pattern cleans up. On this same general subject, realized that a repeat defragment on the same drive without restarting the program results in a distorted operation. Closing and restarting the program resolves the odd behavior. If I had to guess, there is an issue with housekeeping cleanup after one operation leading into a second. This suggests that as workaround until known good, Defraggler needs to be used as a one-shot defragmenter and then restarted before next operation. 2) The time-to-complete projection on a half-full WD 4TB USB drive (tried for grins) initially is maybe several hours. Defraggler runs for a while, then bumps the time-to-complete to ">1day", and keeps chugging along forever with that projection. As a casual comparison, then tried AusLogics free defragmenter on the same drive. It projected maybe several hours to complete, then chugged along to completion as projected. Don't know if the operations were essentially the same, or the related quality and thoroughness to the extent they enter into the picture, but seems like reasonable behavior by the other program. Am on a Dell laptop running updated Win 7 32-bit. Regards, George
  4. What is it doing?

    Just received an e-mail reply from Piriform Support suggesting that I would be hearing in parallel from a forum moderator, which has not yet happened, and that there was nothing untoward in the program behaviors that I described above. To me, there are two very clear issues which are not being recognized. Regarding defrag behavior varying with the situation: I defraggled two identical USB drives with almost identical content sequentially; the second drive showed a dramatically different pattern than the first. The second drive was then defraggled individually; it now showed a pattern relatively identical to the first. Something appears off, and it is not subtle. If helpful, I can run a series of tests and do screen grabs to illustrate this, but would wonder if the development team has done any serious testing in this respect with the sequential functionality, and whether this is in fact indicating a latent and perhaps more general undetected program issue. Regarding time-to-complete estimates: It is unreasonable for a defraggle operation to analyze a situation, embark on defragmentation while projecting an hour or two to complete, then not too long later, flip to a ">1 day" projection to completion. In a similar but less dramatic vein, it is odd for a defraggle operation nearing completion (or so, announcing 1 minute remaining) and then spend another 15+ minutes (subjective estimate, but I can starting keeping records if needed). Perhaps in your world these are don't-cares - that's your call. My interest is only to get the observations accurately identified and recognized in the interest of potentially contributing to the quality of Piriform software with field feedback. Cheers!
  5. What is it doing?

    Would like to apologize to the development team and the forum readers for my moment of pique - the negative tone was unwarranted. Part of my initial reaction was due to disappointment in the nature of the unexpected and unsubtle issues encountered; part was due to wondering if the Piriform products, long an industry standard, are perhaps tending to become over-embellished at the expense of their traditional efficient, effective, reliable core functionality and ease of use. Any perceived issues are my problem and no one else's - sorry. Availability of the product suite absolutely continues to be appreciated and valued. Sincerely, George Lykos
  6. What is it doing?

    Separately reported inconsistency in the handling of similar drives queued for defragging in sequence. The defrag pattern on the second drive is hugely different than the first. Repeating the same operation on the second drive, this time by itself, yields the expected results very similar to the first of the two drives, and very different from the second drive when second in consecutive processing order. Why? Estimated time to complete, which appears to be a relatively new addition to Defraggler, is erratic. For grins, turned Defraggler loose on a WD 4TB passport drive. Estimated time to complete was "> 1 day". Turned [competition product] loose on it, and the defrag was completed in a couple of hours or so. Can't speak to the comparative quality of the operation, but at least their algorithm comes up with a in-this-world plan and execution. In a separate case, ran Defraggler on a Garmin drive in USB mode, and it reported 10 minutes to complete, then after a bit jumped it to several hours, and it does this consistently. Also routinely, time-to-complete gets reported as 1 minute, then can sit there for many minutes until completion. See that Defraggler jumped from 4MB at 2.21 to 6MB at 2.22. What drove the huge increase? Just curious. Regards, George
  7. Am using Defraggler 2.21.993 on several Garmin GPSs set to MFT mode (i.e. normal file-system access) connected to the same Dell laptop (Win 7). When I have two such devices connected, Defraggler recognizes both and allows me to select them and then start defragging - first one is processed, then the next. What I'm consistently seeing is that the defrag results in the second device processed (Defraggler's choice) is distinctly different (and from appearances, inferior) than when that device is selected as the only device to be defragged. My recovery is to re-run the second device defrag by itself (which results in the expected results), and going forward, to not queue multiple devices. It would appear that something in the iterative process is not (re)setting Defraggler as it completes the first defrag and moves to the second, or there is negative interaction of some sort between the completed operation and the second operation, which you would have expected to be executed independently and cleanly. Regards, George
  8. Wish to change my login ID (removing embedded blank) but I seem thoroughly locked in - can't change login name or display name, can't reuse my e-mail address in a new account and can't delete my old one, and there's no support e-mail address given for Piriform. Help! Thanks, George
  9. Greetings! Came across your website while looking for the most recent version of CCleaner. Noticed Defraggler, downloaded it for a look. Am impressed with the professionally-done screen design and operation of these two products. One thought that occurred while playing with Defraggler - the file index tied into the map is a neat feature. I'm surprised that related file catalog info isn't provided or made available through display configuration such as: dates created, accessed, written, and attributes. Regards, George
×