i have files that the Defraggler can't touch. why is it!

[famousken]

i have 45% fragmentation and it is 15gig. this files can't be drefragmented. why is it?​

 

[EvilOzzmess]

If I am not mistaken, the OS files CANNOT be touched, moved or otherwise by disk defragmentor programs and because of the slight chance those actions COULD hose the installation of your OS. Also, 15GB is about the size of Win 7 on the primary HDD (and I believe those files include Windows Updates which cluster with the OS files themselves once installed)... so, hope that answers your question.

In Win XP, the OS files always showed up in green, the used (defragmented) clusters of space in blue, the fragmented in red (fragmented files) and then of course, white (free clusters of remaining HDD space).


I wouldn't worry about it unless you notice the system behaving strangely, slower than normal and etc.

 

[seavixen32]

Quite honestly, Windows 7 is a very stable system and "tweaking" it can soon cause more harm than good.

You'd be well advised to forget about these so-called hard drive cleaners and performance boosters and just let Windows 7 do what it is good at - running your computer.

 

[famousken]

i find in the forums that is advisable to do a defrag every 1-2months. was it ok?

 

[seavixen32]

Nothing wrong with a defrag now and then - I was thinking more of utilities that claim to clean and speed up your hard drive.

 

[BBK]

It may be due to the fact that you are trying to move 500+ mb files and there may not be enough contigous space

 

[DeaconFrost]

I have started to trust third-party defrag apps less and less. The built-in one works well with Windows, and was designed to work with it in use, as well. It can even be scheduled.

 

[Corazon]

I'm exactly the opposite - I always found Windows' bundled defragmenter worthless. (I also hate scheduled tasks, but that's a personal quirk. I want to do everything myself when I decide it's time for it.)
Of course, a third-party app needs to earn my trust first, but Defraggler is one of the best and easiest to use IMHO.

The big question is: which file is the OP unable to defrag? Knowing that would go a long way toward helping him.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's in fact the pagefile. That one and a log file named EtwRtDiagLog.etl are the only two files on my system that are immovable.

If it is the pagefile, the best solution is to disable it, reboot, run a full defrag, then recreate the pagefile which will allow it to be allocated as a single continuous block on the disk.

 

[DeaconFrost]

The built-in defragger is far form worthless, and is in fact, the recommended tool for the job. How or why would you trust a third party app over one that has been proven to do as good of a job, and is already incorporated into the very system it's trying to organize? There hasn't been a reason to run a third-party app in 5 years or so.

Add to all of that, I'm a minimalist. I don't install software "just because". I wouldn't want to add a third-party app to my system, when there's already a fully functional, just as efficient alternative already present.

If you don't want to schedule it....then don't...simple as that.

 

[Corazon]

Point taken, but in the end you and I just have different opinions. Maybe calling Windows' defragger worthless was a poor choice of wording on my part.

I'm a minimalist too, and for that very reason Defraggler is optimal for me. It's small, quick and hardly uses any resources. It also has additional features and I find the graphical display indispensible. (I want to see how the HD is defragged.)

I don't disagree that Windows 7 does a fine job all by itself and doesn't nearly need the kind of third-party enhancements that XP did, but it comes down to choice in the end. If IE comes with Windows, why do many people prefer Firefox or Chrome? You wouldn't tell them they installed another browser "just because" and that IE already works fine, would you.

 

[badger906]

I've always sang diskeepers praises. Surley the recommendation of windows defrager is more the norm as microsoft suggest there own product.

But take my opinion with a pinch of salt! My gaming pc is JUST for games and my media pc is just for films... Everything else I use a mac for lol... Yes traitorsous scum!

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

 

[DeaconFrost]

You wouldn't tell them they installed another browser "just because" and that IE already works fine, would you.

Actually, I do. I use IE as my primary web-browser because it works. Long gone are the days of saying this browser is unsecure, slow, etc. Now it is all a matter of personal preference. On my one system that I do web dev work on, I keep all three major browsers for testing purposes. I was never a fan of Firefox, as it had too many quirks, memory leaks, and now comes with ridiculous version numbering. Chrome is growing on me, but for what I do, IE works just fine. I don't discourage anyone from using just IE, but I also don't discourage anyone from using another browser.

 

[Corazon]

Again, point taken. I was going from the assumption that someone would install a different browser because they prefer using that browser, not because they thought IE was still insecure. I didn't mean to suggest that, in fact I agree completely with you.

We do agree that it all comes down to personal choice in the end.

BTW, I think we've gone off-topic...lol