Advertisement

There's no such thing as a stupid question, but they're the easiest to answer.
Login
Search

Advertisement

All Other Software All Other Software
Search Search
Search for:
Tech Support Guy > > >

Solved: Does registry get defragged when you defrag the HD?


(!)

DKTaber's Avatar
DKTaber   (Don) DKTaber is offline
Computer Specs
Member with 2,513 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington, DE
Experience: Advanced
28-Jun-2012, 04:00 PM #1
Solved: Does registry get defragged when you defrag the HD?
Simple question: I have for years uses both HD defraggers (e.g., Auslogics) AND NTREGOPT. The latter supposedly defrags/compacts the registry, which would make for somewhat shorter boot times. But do programs like Auslogics Defrag also defrag the registry when you run a defrag with them . . . in which case, NTREGOPT is superfluous?
Megabite's Avatar
Member with 11,752 posts.
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
28-Jun-2012, 04:03 PM #2
I cannot see that the registry would need defragging on most any System.
valis's Avatar
Moderator with 63,349 posts.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: as above
28-Jun-2012, 04:37 PM #3
nope, it doesn't get fragmented. It does get some empty space in there from stuff added/deleted, and ntregopt is designed to clear that cludge out. What I've found with ntregopt (at least on xp and down) is that it can drastically cut down boot time.....anything over ~4 or 5% compression and you will notice a big change in your boot time.
__________________
Microsoft M.V.P. - Windows IT Professional | M.C.S.A. | M.C.P. - MS Server 2k3 | blog | rate me

"Ask Bill why the string in function 9 is terminated by a dollar sign. Ask him, because he can't answer. Only I know that". - Gary Kildall
DKTaber's Avatar
DKTaber   (Don) DKTaber is offline
Computer Specs
Member with 2,513 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington, DE
Experience: Advanced
28-Jun-2012, 05:04 PM #4
Quote:
Originally Posted by valis View Post
nope, it doesn't get fragmented.
I thought as much, else why would NTREGOPT exist? But my next question is why don't they? Is it because they're using the registry when defragging (and files being used cannot be defragged)?
stantley's Avatar
Computer Specs
Member with 6,971 posts.
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Pittsburgh PA USA
Experience: Advanced
28-Jun-2012, 10:17 PM #5
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKTaber View Post
files being used cannot be defragged?
Right. You need to get a program that's designed to defrag those files on boot before Windows opens them.

Get PageDefrag which defrags the page file, hibernation file and the registry, but it also shows you how many fragments exist for each file. They normally don't get fragmented.
DKTaber's Avatar
DKTaber   (Don) DKTaber is offline
Computer Specs
Member with 2,513 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington, DE
Experience: Advanced
29-Jun-2012, 08:46 AM #6
Quote:
Originally Posted by stantley View Post
Get PageDefrag which defrags the page file, hibernation file and the registry, but it also shows you how many fragments exist for each file. They normally don't get fragmented.
I installed and ran it. It showed only one file that was fragmented: system32, and indicated 32 fragments (but had a 1 after that; i.e. "32 1"; have no idea what that means). Ran it at the next boot. It went so fast I could not read what it said, but I opened pagedfrg.exe again, and it showed exactly the same thing -- 32 fragments in system32. Everything else was 1, which I assume means contiguous. So my take on the program is that it did nothing.

I also note something strange about pagedfrg.exe. If you run it to just look at what's fragmented, then close it, you can't run it again. Get error message, "Make sure you are an administrator. Error loading PageDefrag driver." I am the administrator. In order to open the program again, you have to reboot. Strange behavior.
valis's Avatar
Moderator with 63,349 posts.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: as above
29-Jun-2012, 09:45 AM #7
is this on the 7 lapper or the xp machine? These are primarily xp tools......

also, Pagedefrag should just give you an option to run at every boot, or just once. On my xp rigs, I just have it set to 'every boot', easier, entire test takes about 10 seconds. Unless your swapfile is hosed, then get comfy.
DKTaber's Avatar
DKTaber   (Don) DKTaber is offline
Computer Specs
Member with 2,513 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington, DE
Experience: Advanced
29-Jun-2012, 10:00 AM #8
Quote:
Originally Posted by valis View Post
is this on the 7 lapper or the xp machine? These are primarily xp tools......

also, Pagedefrag should just give you an option to run at every boot, or just once. On my xp rigs, I just have it set to 'every boot', easier, entire test takes about 10 seconds. Unless your swapfile is hosed, then get comfy.
This is on the XP desktop. I ran it just once, then opened it again to see if there was any change. There was not. . . so I don't see the value in it.
valis's Avatar
Moderator with 63,349 posts.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: as above
29-Jun-2012, 10:08 AM #9
it helps in performance IF your page file is seriously fragmented. That's not very common, but I've seen it a few times.

Just out of curiosity, what is your end goal in mind here? Or are you just checking options?

I always had the below tools on a usb stick when I was in an XP environment........they came in very handy on many occasions.

1. Run ATF.
2. Run ntregopt
3. Run pagedefrag
4. Defrag the harddrive.

In that order. Works wonders for slower rigs.
DKTaber's Avatar
DKTaber   (Don) DKTaber is offline
Computer Specs
Member with 2,513 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington, DE
Experience: Advanced
29-Jun-2012, 10:22 AM #10
Quote:
Originally Posted by valis View Post
it helps in performance IF your page file is seriously fragmented. That's not very common, but I've seen it a few times.

Just out of curiosity, what is your end goal. . .? Or are you just checking options?
I was curious whether defraggers, like Auslogics, which I use, also defragged the registry. That's been answered; they don't. . . so there is some value in very occasionally using a registry defragger (like NTREGOPT, which I've used for years). The other registry defraggers that came to light in this thread were new to me, so I tried one of them (PageDefrag). So while I wasn't looking for options, I did try one. But as I say, not sure they're of much value unless you have a poorly maintained machine, which mine are not.
valis's Avatar
Moderator with 63,349 posts.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: as above
29-Jun-2012, 10:41 AM #11
If yours are not, you are good to go.

One thing I would recommend against is third party defraggers. Reason for this is that all defraggers use a different algorithm to decide what goes where. If Auslogics is different from Windows, Windows will show your drives as heavily fragmented. As Windows is the OS that USES the drives, it would stand to reason that it would be putting more stress on the HD to have Windows searching hither and yon for fragmented files it sees, but that Auslogics shows to be non-fragmented. This is just my opinion, of course, but I reckon if the OS uses the data, then the OS should be what decides where the data goes.
stantley's Avatar
Computer Specs
Member with 6,971 posts.
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Pittsburgh PA USA
Experience: Advanced
29-Jun-2012, 10:42 AM #12
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKTaber View Post
"32 1"; have no idea what that means
The first number 32 is the number of clusters the file occupies. The second number 1 means the file is in one fragment, so no need to defrag.

So at least now you know that your registry doesn't need to be defragged.
DKTaber's Avatar
DKTaber   (Don) DKTaber is offline
Computer Specs
Member with 2,513 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington, DE
Experience: Advanced
30-Jun-2012, 08:10 AM #13
I think I should mention something that happened to my system after running PageDefrag. Neither my desktop computer, which connects to my router via an adapter, nor my Canon wireless printer, would connect to the router. I solved the computer connection with a simple reboot. Didn't know that the printer was also disconnected until this morning when I went to print something. Had to go into the properties and reset the configuration to reconnect it.

I am now very wary of this program, so have removed it from the computer.
DKTaber's Avatar
DKTaber   (Don) DKTaber is offline
Computer Specs
Member with 2,513 posts.
THREAD STARTER
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington, DE
Experience: Advanced
04-Jul-2012, 09:40 AM #14
Quote:
Originally Posted by valis View Post
If yours are not, you are good to go.

One thing I would recommend against is third party defraggers. Reason for this is that all defraggers use a different algorithm to decide what goes where. If Auslogics is different from Windows, Windows will show your drives as heavily fragmented. . . .
Whenever I try a 3rd-party defragger, I always do a defrag with it, then open Windows' defragger and have it analyze the drive. Doing that after running Auslogics results in the message from the Windows' defragger "You do not need to defragment this volume." IOW, Windows also finds the drive is not fragmented. So while the two programs may use different algorithms, the end result is either the same or is "agreeable" to both.

BTW, the incidents that got me to start using Auslogics were (1) I was using IOBit's defragger when the news broke that it is a Chinese company and had stolen code from Malwarebytes for one of its products. I didn't want to support a company with those ethics. (2) I had just acquired a new Win 7 laptop in which the Windows defragger is, by default, set to run once a week. Being curious about its performance, I ran it manually. Most inefficient program I've ever encountered. Pass after pass after pass after pass, taking almost an hour for a drive that had very few fragmented files. Auslogics does the same thing in less than 2 minutes. So I have disabled the Windows defragger.
Elvandil's Avatar
Computer Specs
Moderator with 51,993 posts.
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vermont
Experience: "Been through the mill."
04-Jul-2012, 09:50 AM #15
I think there is some confusion here. What NTRegOpt does to the registry is not "defragging" in any technical sense. That's why it is also called "compression". As explained, NTRegOpt rebuilds the registry from the ground up, leaving out empty space, so that the registry files are somewhat smaller. The old files are replaced by the new ones on reboot. Usually, that makes little difference, but if the compression is significant, it can speed loading to RAM and thus the speed of the machine in general. But this has nothing to do with the hard drive or any drive "defragmenters".

Drive defragmenters defrag all the files on the drive. Some are able to use VSS to defrag even some files that are in use. The registry files are not defragged because they are always in use if the machine is running Windows. That's where things liike boot-time defrag and PageDefrag come in. They defrag the files that could not be defragged on the disk when they were in use, like reg files, the page file, hibernation file, and sometimes others, like directories and file metadata.

In short, they are totally different types of "defrag" and there are benefits to using both. NTRegOpt does not defrag the registry files (it "defrags" or compresses the actual database), so a defragger still needs to do that. Offline defrags do it, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DKTaber View Post
Whenever I try a 3rd-party defragger, I always do a defrag with it, then open Windows' defragger and have it analyze the drive. Doing that after running Auslogics results in the message from the Windows' defragger "You do not need to defragment this volume." IOW, Windows also finds the drive is not fragmented. So while the two programs may use different algorithms, the end result is either the same or is "agreeable" to both.
That won't always be the case. And some will even say you are heavily fragmented after a defrag is done by a different one. Measuring fragmentation is done differently, too, like percentage of drive with fragmented files, number of files fragmented, number of clusters containing fragments of files that are not contiguous, and many more. So the percentage can sometimes be next to meaningless. It's a good idea to stick with just one.
__________________
Microsoft MVP
異驚の界世 ípןɹoʍ ǝɥʇ ɟo sɹǝpuoʍ ǝɥʇ ɟo ǝuo sı ǝpoɔıun ʞuıɥʇ ı

Last edited by Elvandil; 04-Jul-2012 at 09:58 AM..
As Seen On

BBC, Reader's Digest, PC Magazine, Today Show, Money Magazine
WELCOME TO TECH SUPPORT GUY!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.


(clock)
THIS THREAD HAS EXPIRED.
Are you having the same problem? We have volunteers ready to answer your question, but first you'll have to join for free. Need help getting started? Check out our Welcome Guide.

Search Tech Support Guy

Find the solution to your
computer problem!




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


WELCOME
You Are Using: Server ID
Trusted Website Back to the Top ↑