Defragger recommendations

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Ray Greene, Nov 6, 2006.

  1. Ray Greene

    Ray Greene Guest

    Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    slow it down too much would be nice.

    --
    Ray Greene
     
    Ray Greene, Nov 6, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ray Greene

    EMB Guest

    Ray Greene wrote:
    > Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    > NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    > slow it down too much would be nice.
    >

    Back the drive up, format it and then restore the data.

    --
    EMB
     
    EMB, Nov 7, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ray Greene

    Daniel Guest

    Ray Greene wrote:
    > Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    > NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    > slow it down too much would be nice.
    >


    You could try the full (not trial) version of Diskeeper 9.0 Home Edition
    for about $9.00 if you buy this month's Australian PC User magazine?
     
    Daniel, Nov 7, 2006
    #3
  4. In message <eiof1e$160$>, Ray Greene wrote:

    > Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of
    > data) NTFS drive on a file server?


    Switch to an OS that implements more intelligent file-allocation algorithms.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 7, 2006
    #4
  5. Ray Greene

    k Guest

    Ray Greene wrote:
    > Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    > NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    > slow it down too much would be nice.
    >


    PerfectDisk from http://www.raxco.com/ is what I swear by :)
     
    k, Nov 7, 2006
    #5
  6. Ray Greene

    EMB Guest

    wrote:
    > On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 14:31:52 +1300, EMB <> wrote:
    >
    >> Ray Greene wrote:
    >>> Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    >>> NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    >>> slow it down too much would be nice.
    >>>

    >> Back the drive up, format it and then restore the data.

    >
    >
    >
    > Please get Real..
    >
    > What a Utterly Stupid reply..


    If files on the server are being modified much I'd be fairly certain
    that a slow old machine like that wouldn't manage to defrag any faster
    than the changes were occurring. On an underpowered server with 600GB
    of data my suggestion is probably the most effective and quick method of
    doing a "defrag".

    As an aside Roger, your "mainframe" experience doesn't count for shit in
    a scenario like this either.


    --
    EMB
     
    EMB, Nov 7, 2006
    #6
  7. Ray Greene

    Ray Greene Guest

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 19:07:07 +1300, EMB <> wrote:

    > wrote:
    >> On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 14:31:52 +1300, EMB <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Ray Greene wrote:
    >>>> Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    >>>> NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    >>>> slow it down too much would be nice.
    >>>>
    >>> Back the drive up, format it and then restore the data.


    600GB? Not bloody likely :)

    >> Please get Real..
    >>
    >> What a Utterly Stupid reply..

    >
    >If files on the server are being modified much I'd be fairly certain
    >that a slow old machine like that wouldn't manage to defrag any faster
    >than the changes were occurring. On an underpowered server with 600GB
    >of data my suggestion is probably the most effective and quick method of
    >doing a "defrag".


    The majority of the data doesn't get modified that much so it should keep up.

    Your suggestion is certainly effective, I've done it in the past, but with
    that much data is certainly isn't quick.

    --
    Ray Greene.
     
    Ray Greene, Nov 7, 2006
    #7
  8. Ray Greene

    Guest

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 14:31:52 +1300, EMB <> wrote:

    >Ray Greene wrote:
    >> Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    >> NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    >> slow it down too much would be nice.
    >>

    >Back the drive up, format it and then restore the data.




    Please get Real..

    What a Utterly Stupid reply..
     
    , Nov 7, 2006
    #8
  9. Ray Greene

    Ray Greene Guest

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 14:56:09 +1300, Daniel <> wrote:

    >Ray Greene wrote:
    >> Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    >> NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    >> slow it down too much would be nice.
    >>

    >
    >You could try the full (not trial) version of Diskeeper 9.0 Home Edition
    >for about $9.00 if you buy this month's Australian PC User magazine?


    I'lll have to check that out, I wouldn't mind a copy for myself.

    It won't solve my problem unfortunately, I had a look at the Diskeeper site
    today and that version only handles volumes up to 768GB, the fileserver drive
    is 850GB.

    --
    Ray Greene
     
    Ray Greene, Nov 7, 2006
    #9
  10. Ray Greene

    Ray Greene Guest

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 18:52:20 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    <_zealand> wrote:

    >In message <eiof1e$160$>, Ray Greene wrote:
    >
    >> Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of
    >> data) NTFS drive on a file server?

    >
    >Switch to an OS that implements more intelligent file-allocation algorithms.


    We have one of those but it's used as a backup to the main fileserver. I'm
    the only Linux user at work so it's not really viable to use it as the main
    machine when no one else there can work on it.

    --
    Ray Greene
     
    Ray Greene, Nov 7, 2006
    #10
  11. Ray Greene

    Ray Greene Guest

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 19:06:11 +1300, k <> wrote:

    >Ray Greene wrote:
    >> Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    >> NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    >> slow it down too much would be nice.
    >>

    >
    >PerfectDisk from http://www.raxco.com/ is what I swear by :)


    I'll check it out, thanks.

    --
    Ray Greene
     
    Ray Greene, Nov 7, 2006
    #11
  12. Ray Greene

    Ray Greene Guest

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 20:09:58 +1300, wrote:

    >On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 12:05:07 +1300, Ray Greene <> wrote:
    >
    >>Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    >>NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    >>slow it down too much would be nice.

    >
    >
    >
    >I think ? Diskeeper 8 is now Free.
    >
    >http://www.diskeeper.com/defrag.asp


    I had a look but I didn't see it there anywhere.

    --
    Ray Greene
     
    Ray Greene, Nov 7, 2006
    #12
  13. Ray Greene

    EMB Guest

    Ray Greene wrote:
    >
    > Your suggestion is certainly effective, I've done it in the past, but with
    > that much data is certainly isn't quick.


    I guess I'm a bit spoiled - our tape array handles manages about 8GB/min
    when backing up and a bit better when restoring so I see a 600GB backup
    and restore as a quick task.


    --
    EMB
     
    EMB, Nov 7, 2006
    #13
  14. Ray Greene

    Guest

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 12:05:07 +1300, Ray Greene <> wrote:

    >Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB of data)
    >NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so something that won't
    >slow it down too much would be nice.




    I think ? Diskeeper 8 is now Free.

    http://www.diskeeper.com/defrag.asp
     
    , Nov 7, 2006
    #14
  15. In message <eipagt$2ph$>, Ray Greene wrote:

    > On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 19:07:07 +1300, EMB <> wrote:
    >
    >> wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 14:31:52 +1300, EMB <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Ray Greene wrote:
    >>>>> Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB
    >>>>> of data) NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so
    >>>>> something that won't slow it down too much would be nice.
    >>>>>
    >>>> Back the drive up, format it and then restore the data.

    >
    > 600GB? Not bloody likely :)


    Why not? It would fit nicely on one extra drive.

    >>> Please get Real..
    >>>
    >>> What a Utterly Stupid reply..


    Actually it's the only safe, sensible one that doesn't run the risk of
    losing data.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 7, 2006
    #15
  16. Ray Greene

    Ray Greene Guest

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 20:10:39 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    <_zealand> wrote:

    >In message <eipagt$2ph$>, Ray Greene wrote:
    >
    >> On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 19:07:07 +1300, EMB <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>> On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 14:31:52 +1300, EMB <> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Ray Greene wrote:
    >>>>>> Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB
    >>>>>> of data) NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so
    >>>>>> something that won't slow it down too much would be nice.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Back the drive up, format it and then restore the data.

    >>
    >> 600GB? Not bloody likely :)

    >
    >Why not? It would fit nicely on one extra drive.


    At a cost of around $800 for the drive, plus a card to handle a drive that
    size, for a one-off operation, plus the fileserver would be out of operation
    while I did it. And it will just get fragmented again. Diskeeper is $US100.

    >>>> Please get Real..
    >>>>
    >>>> What a Utterly Stupid reply..

    >
    >Actually it's the only safe, sensible one that doesn't run the risk of
    >losing data.


    Real defraggers are pretty safe. We have backups anyway.

    --
    Ray Greene
     
    Ray Greene, Nov 7, 2006
    #16
  17. Ray Greene

    Ray Greene Guest

    On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 20:06:00 +1300, EMB <> wrote:

    >Ray Greene wrote:
    >>
    >> Your suggestion is certainly effective, I've done it in the past, but with
    >> that much data is certainly isn't quick.

    >
    >I guess I'm a bit spoiled - our tape array handles manages about 8GB/min
    >when backing up and a bit better when restoring so I see a 600GB backup
    >and restore as a quick task.


    I hate tape drives. I was badly let down once by a tape drive setup that
    reported successful backups but wasn't actually working.

    Now I use USB hard drives, I find they are ideal for our situation. We only
    back up the important stuff on them so we only need 200GB drives.

    8GB/min is quite quick though isn't it? You are spoiled :)

    --
    Ray Greene
     
    Ray Greene, Nov 7, 2006
    #17
  18. Ray Greene

    EMB Guest

    Ray Greene wrote:
    >
    > I hate tape drives. I was badly let down once by a tape drive setup that
    > reported successful backups but wasn't actually working.


    We run a verify of every backup - I've seen one verify failure in the
    last 2 years of nightly backups. I also run a test restore about once a
    month just to make sure everything is going to behave in the event we
    need it. I also end up retrieving something a user has "lost" every few
    weeks, a task that I'm off to do yet again later this evening.

    --
    EMB
     
    EMB, Nov 7, 2006
    #18
  19. On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 20:00:57 +1300, Ray Greene wrote:

    > We have one of those but it's used as a backup to the main fileserver. I'm
    > the only Linux user at work so it's not really viable to use it as the main
    > machine when no one else there can work on it.


    Sounds like a good job security move to me. :)

    --
    Rupert Boleyn <>
     
    Rupert Boleyn, Nov 7, 2006
    #19
  20. In message <eipcpq$2ph$>, Ray Greene wrote:

    > On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 20:10:39 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    > <_zealand> wrote:
    >
    >>In message <eipagt$2ph$>, Ray Greene wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 19:07:07 +1300, EMB <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> wrote:
    >>>>> On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 14:31:52 +1300, EMB <> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Ray Greene wrote:
    >>>>>>> Can anyone recommend a good background defragger for a large (~600GB
    >>>>>>> of data) NTFS drive on a file server? It's only a PIII 800 so
    >>>>>>> something that won't slow it down too much would be nice.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> Back the drive up, format it and then restore the data.
    >>>
    >>> 600GB? Not bloody likely :)

    >>
    >>Why not? It would fit nicely on one extra drive.

    >
    > At a cost of around $800 for the drive, plus a card to handle a drive that
    > size, for a one-off operation, plus the fileserver would be out of
    > operation while I did it. And it will just get fragmented again.


    In that case, it wouldn't be a "one-off" operation, would it?

    > Diskeeper is $US100.


    For this version. Then you'd have to buy the upgrade next time. And so on.

    > Real defraggers are pretty safe. We have backups anyway.


    In that case why not use them?
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 7, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jim

    Recommendations for WPA hardware?

    Jim, Apr 6, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    513
    Barb Bowman [MVP-Windows]
    Apr 7, 2005
  2. bolshy

    defragger

    bolshy, Feb 27, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    794
    Plato
    Feb 28, 2005
  3. Doc
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    1,214
    Mitch
    Dec 11, 2007
  4. Stan

    Help! Defragger nightmares!

    Stan, Dec 23, 2005, in forum: A+ Certification
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    387
  5. BP

    Defragger (and other) Over head

    BP, Jun 1, 2009, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    475
    Tony Sperling
    Jun 3, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page