Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 15:28:10 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> To: "Mark Ovens" <markov@globalnet.co.uk> Cc: "Phil Regnauld" <regnauld@ftf.net>, <chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Known MMAP() race conditions ... ? Message-ID: <000201bece48$2778d4f0$021d85d1@youwant.to> In-Reply-To: <19990714223600.A524@marder-1>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > "a little bit"? Have you any idea how many *hours* Diskeeper takes > > > to defrag a 2.5GB NTFS partition after only a few weeks since the > > > last defrag? > > > > Hmm. It's never been that bad for me. My 9Gb NTFS partitions > > defragment in less than an hour. > > > > I guess it depends how full the partition is. My 2.5GB has >2GB of > data on it, not a lot of elbow room for Diskeeper to work with. My recollection is that Microsoft recommends that you keep your NTFS partitions less than half full to 'solve' this problem. > > My AdvFS partitions on Digital UNIX machines took days to > > defragment. And they were often more fragmented when they > > finished than when they started. > > Just to illustrate how bad NTFS is, there are certain files DK > won't touch (shelliconcache is one). Move them to another partition, > delete the original, defrag, move the files back, run DK again, > and guess what? the file(s) you just moved back are already > fragmented. Hmm. I've never heard that before. I wonder how it manages to do that. I think the amount of contiguous space reserved for a file when it's created is tunable. But making that too large just makes things worse. By the way, I just recently enabled softupdates on the FreeBSD machine that I use the most heavily. The performance difference is astounding. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000201bece48$2778d4f0$021d85d1>