[SOLVED] Defrag Problems

Status
This thread has been Locked and is not open to further replies. Please start a New Thread if you're having a similar issue. View our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Argeebee

Thread Starter
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
16
I have windows 98 SE on my computer. Defragmenting was just done less than a month ago. When I try to defrag my computer now, it takes forever, even in safe mode. I have disabled my Auto-protect on my anti-virus and defrag has taken over a day so far and is only up to 70%. I got into Safe mode to defrag thanks to the helpful advice of a TSG member.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2003
Messages
16,274
Try doing a disk cleanup. Start, programs, accesories system tools, disk cleanup prior to defrag. Also if your drive is getting in such a state then defrag every two weeks or so till you get a handle on it. Set it to run in the sleep hours so it will be completed for morning.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2003
Messages
110
It would be to your advantage to give up on the built-in defragger windows comes with, it's extremely slow and not very efficient at what it does. Go to your favorite download site and get the free "Diskeeper Lite" program, you'll be amazed!
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2003
Messages
110
Hi again, As Motherboard also mentions, do a 'Disk Cleanup' and also run 'ScanDisk' before defragging. I have a static swap file size of 800mb so in my case I also disable my swap file on occasion to defrag that area as well. It might also be a good idea to empty your temp files, temporary internet files, browsing history, and your cookies folder if you are sure you don't need them.
 

WhitPhil

Gone but never forgotten
Trusted Advisor
Joined
Oct 4, 2000
Messages
8,684
"I have a static swap file size of 800mb so in my case I also disable my swap file on occasion to defrag that area as well"

A static swapfile by definition is one contiguous area. Disabling it, and doing a defrag will do nothing.
 

Argeebee

Thread Starter
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
16
Thanks go to 2 TSG Members whose helpful suggestions resolved my problems as quick as 123.
Member "Moby" told me how to get into "Safe Mode".
And member "The Joost" suggested that I use Diskeeper lite (free) instead of the windows defragmenter.

Argeebee
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2003
Messages
110
WhitPhil, I would respectfully disagree with your assessment of virtual memory function. I am well aware of what contiguous means. Yes, I do have an 800mb swap file, never gets bigger, never gets smaller, it sits at the end of my E drive. Yes, in order to defrag that area it is necessary to temporarily disable it and after defrag it needs to be enabled and reset. Most people will just let Windows manage the virtual memory, growing and shrinking as needed by the exchange of data between disk and ram. Myself?, I prefer to have a specific size swap file in a specific location. But hey!, that's just me. ;)
 

WhitPhil

Gone but never forgotten
Trusted Advisor
Joined
Oct 4, 2000
Messages
8,684
TheJoost

When you define a MAX and a MIN on the swapfile, the resulting file is contiguous.

Since it is, there is never a need to defrag it.

I'm not sure how you managed to get it to the end of your E: drive though. Unless you mean it's on your E: partition, which is the last one on your physical drive.

I "presume" you are aware that having it at the end, will now incur longer access times due to head movement, when Windows actually has to do some paging activity.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2003
Messages
110
Hi WhitPhil, It would seem current wisdom backs up your statement (y) , the people recommending defrag of the swap file area must mean only if you let Windows manage the size. As I was wandering around different sites it leaves me even more curious as to why there is such a wide range of opinions on optimizing the swap file! :confused: It seems to me that if you set the min and the max to the same size, and make it larger than you expect to use, then you should be fine. I see some who say that the min should be relatively small so that it's faster to search, some seem to be of the opinion that a large min and an even larger max is the way to go, I saw one that states that it doesn't really matter either way because Windows will "overflow" if it needs more space no matter what the settings are, I even noticed an add for a program that claims to "erase" data from the swap file!? Confusing to say the least! So, what did I learn from all this?, that since I have no issues with the swap file that I will just continue my 800mb fixed size. On the seek time vs. swap file location, I have the os on C, with the remaining space split between D and E. Since E is practically empty and the swap file seems to reside at the end of the data, would'nt it be closer to the middle (at least at present) of the disk than putting it elsewhere? Or would I be better off putting it on D which is where I spend most of my time? IS THERE NO SANITY?? Cheers! :D TheJoost
 

WhitPhil

Gone but never forgotten
Trusted Advisor
Joined
Oct 4, 2000
Messages
8,684
Hi TheJoost:

You've done some good research.

The first question to ask is how much do I use of the swapfile.

You resolve this by running SYSMON (and monitoring swapfile INUSE not Size), while you run a heavier than normal mix of applications.

If the resulting average is low (10-20MBs), just leave the driving to Windows. More than that you "can" "consider" creating a fixed swapfile. BUT, you should never set a MAX.

When Windows runs out of swap space and needs more, applications will start to fail or Windows will. It will NOT expand the size.

By setting a MIN (use 10-20MBs higher than the monitored inuse), you get the benefits of 2 worlds; a static swapfile (contiguous) and one that CAN expand if it really needs to.

On low memory, slow PCs, VM was an issue that needed to be tuned. On the large, fast PCs of today (not running Win95 where resizing happens frequently), VM shouldn't be an issue.
 
Status
This thread has been Locked and is not open to further replies. Please start a New Thread if you're having a similar issue. View our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

As Seen On
As Seen On...

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.

Join over 807,865 other people just like you!

Latest posts

Members online

Top