Solved Defraggler adds 10+GB

[MadSupra354]

I was defragging, and I don't know why, but when it finished with the drive fragmentation at 1%, I started it again. Big mistake, my hard drive space went from 140GB to 155GB. I think it moved data in this area:

The green arrow is pointing to my backup drive. I need to keep my Local Disk under 143GB to be able to run backup. I know, it's a 1TB and I'm using under a quarter of it. I will sort this out (hopefully in this thread) about new backup locations etcetera and buy a hard drive when prices fall.
Back to topic, it might show white in those middle spots, but there is data there:

So, would it be possible to resolve this and get my hard drive space back down?

 

[Infinite]

I think it does this because it is trying to make contiguous blocks while it is copying/moving files around so temporarily creates these files.

 

[GeneO]

It is probably because you have system restore enabled on the volume. System Restore uses volume shadow copy service (vss). Defraggler is not VSS aware, so when it moves blocks around, the OS interprets this as file changes and makes a copy of the blocks for the restore point. If you want to avoid this, use a defragmenter that is VSS friendly like Windows 7 defragmenter (what I would advise), or Diskeeper. OTOH, you could disable system restore for the volume, but that has obvious drawbacks.

 

[cluberti]

For what it's worth, the very latest version adds a VSS compatibile mode, which should avoid this entirely. If you aren't using 2.08.373 of Defraggler, time to upgrade.

 

[GeneO]

That looks quite different than what windows and diskeeper do. I believe they try to avoid triggering VSS copies during defragmentation while it looks likes this version of defraggler disables VSS. I expect that has a pretty negative impact on system restore points if you are updating files while defraggler is running.

 

[cluberti]

True, but a defrag program that does "VSS-aware" defragmentation (which means it does copy-on-write file movement with larger than 16KB allocation unit size chunks) has the potential to be less effective than a "full-on" defrag (and it still fills up VSS and can age out data, it just does it much more slowly), which is the counter to that pendulum swing. You either deal with the potential for more fragmentation after a defrag pass but with far less VSS aging, or you disable VSS, defrag more agressively, and have a much higher risk of losing VSS data and the always-there potential of disk usage growth.

It's a hard choice to make, but as we generally recommend full backups before screwing with the system, it does makes VSS restore points less necessary. It is a good point to make, though, and one must debate which is more important - if you want a defrag program that is "VSS-aware", as far as I am aware you will have to pay for it if inbox defrag.exe isn't good enough for you - I know of no freeware that does this other than the inbox defrag.

 

[GeneO]

True, but a defrag program that does "VSS-aware" defragmentation (which means it does copy-on-write file movement with larger than 16KB allocation unit size chunks) has the potential to be less effective than a "full-on" defrag (and it still fills up VSS and can age out data, it just does it much more slowly), which is the counter to that pendulum swing. You either deal with the potential for more fragmentation after a defrag pass but with far less VSS aging, or you disable VSS, defrag more agressively, and have a much higher risk of losing VSS data and the always-there potential of disk usage growth.

It's a hard choice to make, but as we generally recommend full backups before screwing with the system, it does makes VSS restore points less necessary. It is a good point to make, though, and one must debate which is more important - if you want a defrag program that is "VSS-aware", as far as I am aware you will have to pay for it if inbox defrag.exe isn't good enough for you - I know of no freeware that does this other than the inbox defrag.

I don't think that is correct. There is more to VSS-awareness than recognizing 16k allocation unit. The algorithms avoid copy on write by other means from what I can reckon from the literature b. In my experience I found Windows 7 defragmentation did little to grow my shadow space on my HDD, knows about the internals and how to fragment the MFT and other system files - I wouldn't trust another.

 

[MadSupra354]

So, Windows Disk Defragment or Defraggler with the advanced option enabled?
My hard drive fragmentation is >1%, so if I where to use Defraggler VSS aware, would it move the blocks appropriately?

 

[Ravi5kumar]

What are the advantages of deffraging a hard disk:sarc:?? I never used it. Does it increase performance??

 

[logicearth]

What are the advantages of deffraging a hard disk:sarc:?? I never used it. Does it increase performance??

Only for hugely fragmented drives. 1% is NOTHING. Anything below 20% is really not that big of a deal. Windows 7 does defragmention automaticly behind the scenes on a weekly bases.

 

[MadSupra354]

Tried Defraggler. Didn't really help.

Does this mean I have to use another program? If I do, would it matter if my hard drive wasn't fragmented? As you can see there, it's near enough fragment free.

 

[MadSupra354]

Wait a minute! :roflmao: I don't think it's defragmenting...
Looking through that last snap, you see those pagefile blocks, but it wasn't just pagefile. There was a full game that I uninstalled ages ago!

Oh Origin! How you don't know how to uninstall games!
Maybe there is a defragmenting problem, but if I delete this there will be enough space to backup.