Why does Diskeeper 2008 do this?

[Pikarya]

http://imgshack.info/images/x6iy0ah9hij4ioq5m19x.jpg

I'm not to savvy with how defragmentation works. But why does Diskeeper seperate those Blue files in the middle so far from the top group when its "Completed"?

Thanks

edit: Hell, why doesen't any of the blue at the bottom either get moved to the top?

[Norellicus]

Because it doesn't matter where they are on the disk, just as long as concurrent blocks of data are in the same area so they get read in order without having to make multiple passes. Having all the used space at the top and free space at the bottom means nothing to the logic system in the read/write heads.

To understand effective defragmentation you need to understand how the principles of the File Allocation Table work. I can elaborate if you like, but I'll leave it at that if it makes enough sense for you.

[Pikarya]

Makes enough sense to me! For a minute I thought I wasted good money on this program since I thought it wasen't doing its job. Thanks for the quick reply.

[blackarrow]

Don't worry about it, it's normal. I have Diskeeper 2008 Pro and it's similar.

When you run a manual defrag, it's designed to finish quickly to yield the maximum benefit with minimum amount of time. Sometimes some files are not moved if there is no performance benefit in moving them.

The files at the end are most likely static or system files which don't change (or fragment) much, so there is no use putting them along with the files that do change (and fragment).

Tip: I find that the best way to use Diskeeper is to leave it in automatic defragmentation mode. It works in the background invisibly and defrags the drives when essential.

[SephYuyX]

Curious, why did you pay for this program when you could use the windows version for free? I did a quick check ot their site to check, unless i missed something, but the actual defrag process is the same, unless your using this prog for one of the additional features. Windows version is also capable of running in the background and at times you specify is well.

[Norellicus]

To my knowledge, Diskeeper is more efficient at grouping data into logical clusters than the windows defrag, since it monitors your program use and data access to find out what gets used concurrently, rather than just making sure all the blocks for individual files are in line with no regard for how they're used or what programs they get used with.

Edit: Also, MS has never been reliable about background apps truly running in the 'background' and leaving your memory available for 'foreground' use when the PC isn't idle, where diskeeper will internally create a laundry list of tasks to perform once you go idle.

[Fallso]

To my knowledge, Diskeeper is more efficient at grouping data into logical clusters than the windows defrag, since it monitors your program use and data access to find out what gets used concurrently, rather than just making sure all the blocks for individual files are in line with no regard for how they're used or what programs they get used with.

Edit: Also, MS has never been reliable about background apps truly running in the 'background' and leaving your memory available for 'foreground' use when the PC isn't idle, where diskeeper will internally create a laundry list of tasks to perform once you go idle.

This, plus it's fast, defrags on the fly and is available free if you know where to look.

[Pikarya]

Well my IT as work suggested Dkeeper08 since they use the business versions on our computers and laptops. And it always just worked flawlessly.

Anyways, after playing and configuring with it abit its acutally alot nicer than I had thought.

[blackarrow]

+1.
It was recommended to me too by the IT folks at the Univ.
BTW, Diskeeper can defrag files (like the $MFT) which the windows defragmenter skips, and its automation features totally rock.

[Pikarya]

Today I brought in my laptop in, and one of the guys in the IT showed me the setting on how to consolidate all the directories on my drive. Anyways, just a heads up to anyone with Dkeeper 08.

http://imgshack.info/images/qzxvt0tt1lojyt1pb7jx.jpg