From: Arno on
Ant <ant(a)zimage.comant> wrote:
> Hi!

> Are there any good free disk disk defraggers that can be run outside of
> Windows like with a boot disk/disc or before Windows is loaded?
> Sometimes, files can't be defragged because of them being in used.

> Thank you in advance. :)

Separate second windows installation?

Arno
--
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno(a)wagner.name
GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans
From: DevilsPGD on
In message <AvOdnT2x9ahfOJDWnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com> Ant
<ant(a)zimage.comANT> was claimed to have wrote:

>Hi!
>
>Are there any good free disk disk defraggers that can be run outside of
>Windows like with a boot disk/disc or before Windows is loaded?
>Sometimes, files can't be defragged because of them being in used.
>
>Thank you in advance. :)

Contig.
From: DevilsPGD on
In message <5rGdnU9B4fPJnZPWnZ2dnUVZ_gFi4p2d(a)earthlink.com> Ant
<ant(a)zimage.comANT> was claimed to have wrote:

>On 11/25/2009 7:50 PM PT, DevilsPGD typed:
>
>>> Are there any good free disk disk defraggers that can be run outside of
>>> Windows like with a boot disk/disc or before Windows is loaded?
>>> Sometimes, files can't be defragged because of them being in used.
>>>
>>> Thank you in advance. :)
>>
>> Contig.
>
>http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897428.aspx says only
>for XP and higher. What about 2000 SP4? Can this defragger move
>pagefile, MFT, etc. too?

Contig was supported on NT4 and Windows 2000 back in the day, but I
don't run any legacy OSes here so I can't speak to the current state of
affairs.

Worst case, you'll need to snag an older version of Contig.
From: Don Lope de Aguirre on
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7n6eooF3ibh58U1(a)mid.individual.net...
> There is no point in furiously defragging anymore.

How about defragging once a month at least? If it is now useless then why
does both Vista and Win7 have tasks auto set to defrag once per week? It
seems that Microsoft disagrees with you.

From: Rod Speed on
Don Lope de Aguirre wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote

>> There is no point in furiously defragging anymore.

> How about defragging once a month at least?

There are very few systems that benefit at all from anything like as high a defrag rate as that.

> If it is now useless then why does both Vista and Win7 have tasks auto set to defrag once per week?

There are plenty who cant grasp that defragging most modern systems is pointless.

> It seems that Microsoft disagrees with you.

Yes, but then they have done that in the past and ended up doing
it my way too, most obviously with sleeping hard drives by default.

What matters is that there are very few situations where extra seeks
due to fragmentation are even detectable by the user in a proper
double blind trial. The vast bulk of linear access to large files is with
media files where the speed of access to the file is entirely dependant
on the media play speed and so extra seeks arent even visible at all.

The bulk of other access to large files is not linear, most obviously
with databases, so there arent even any extra seeks at all with those.

One situation where you do see extra seeks matter is copying very
large files, most obviously video files, but it makes a lot more sense
to avoid copying those than to furiously defrag to improve the speed
of copying those files.

Similarly with backups, it makes a lot more sense to do the
backups in the background or when the system is not being
used than to furiously defrag or even defrag monthly.