Defraggler does not defragment/report on moveable system files

[Shaggie]

According to http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa363911(v=vs.85).aspx many system files can be defragmented, however these files such as $UsnJrnl and $ObjId do not show up in the defragmented files list. I do find them when inspecting blocks and it shows there as fragmented.

That article shows them as the following:

• $Extend\$UsnJrnl:$J:$DATA
  
• $Extend\$UsnJrnl::$ATTRIBUTE_LIST
  
• $Extend\$UsnJrnl:$Max:$DATA
  
• $Extend\$ObjId:$O:$INDEX_ALLOCATION
  
• $Extend\$ObjId::$ATTRIBUTE_LIST
  
• $Extend\$ObjId:$O:$BITMAP
  

I take this to mean that all of these exist in the hidden $Extend folder.

 

I find that quite often one or more of the files listed in the article cause other files to not be defragmented as the system file(s) are stored in the middle of where defraggler has decided to place the non-system file.

 

Is there a reason for these not showing in the listings or defragmenting them?

[eL_PuSHeR]

Did you try the boot time defrag?

[Shaggie]

I tried the boot time defrag, but have not noticed any improvement in these files.

It is difficult to tell since I do not see much info about what is being moved during an offline (boot time) defrag.

Since a boot time defrag does not defragment all files, it can leave those in the middle of where it decides to place other files when doing an online defrag, even if these "unmoveable" files are not fragmented. It can therefore cause other files to be left fragmented during that online defrag. I have noticed this during my attempts to defragment my hard drive on Windows XP. I had to use a trial of another defragementer to eliminate this problem. I have not mentioned the name of it as I believe that is against forum policy.

If it were possible to do a full defrag during an offline defrag, or these files were included in an online defrag, it would eliminate this problem.

Note that http://www.piriform.com/docs/defraggler/technical-information/boot-time-defrag does not specify any of those files.

[kroozer]

Is there a reason for these not showing in the listings or defragmenting them?

 

Cos they are $Files, programs ignore them. HostWeb provides some info.

[Shaggie]

Yes I see, however defraggler does not really ignore them as I can see them in the drive map, and Microsoft themselves say these files can be defragmented.

I wouldn't mind as much if leaving them didn't cause other files to be fragmented. What seems to happen is that defraggler decides to map a file to a section of the hard drive, however that section contains one or more of these files causing it to be fragmented.

I do not understand why some other defragmenters can defragment these files & defraggler cannot.

That being said, I still think defraggler generally does an excellent job, even better than many paid defragmenters.

[kroozer]

I accept your affirmation.

 

Now a reality point -- an absolute zero frag count may yield a tidy map, yet with modern seek-times and fast cpu's there doesn't seem to be any performance loss by having a disk somewhat fragged. I don't notice any difference in system response with or without a zero fragged volume. Defragging will likely speed a neglected disk, but not one serviced occasionally. It's not worth the fussing.

[Shaggie]

What you say makes sense. I would think however that if defraggler did handle these files then it would eliminate a lot of posts about this kind of thing, either specifically or generically. What I was thinking about when mentioning that it causes other files to be fragmented is that it typically moves large files into the area of unmovable files when there are plenty of small files on the drive that could go there without being fragmented.

 

Anyway, thanks to all for the information.