Quantcast

Maximum PC

It is currently Wed Aug 20, 2014 9:36 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:50 am 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:06 pm
Posts: 93
" Its my understanding that Norton didn't supply the defrag utility for XP - so not "left out", more like "not there" " Nope, last I heard they didn't SUPPLY it for XP. But they DO make versions which are claimed compatible with XP. I'll have to look back through my install disc collection, but I think it was about the SystemWorks '03 that first claimed compatibility with XP. Either that or '04...

"QUESTION: Does this "movement" happen just after the defrag, or after a restart?" So far as I can tell, the answer to that question is YES... Before, During, After, and most any time in between (or any time the system is actually running). I would presume the file(s) being moved at any given time depended on the app being run at that time. Shuffling files that aren't even in use would make even less sense then "Keyboard Not Found, Press Any Key To Continue".

And no, Windows Defrag, at least that supplied with XP, does NOT give any specific information of what file is located at what specific allocation unit. It will tell you what file it is moving at whatever time it is moving it, but that's all...


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:31 am 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:06 pm
Posts: 93
I would suppose, should someone feel sufficiently bored or otherwise have nothing better to do with their time, they could specificlly watch defrg run and make list of ech file moved. Then, after it's complete, serch out each file nd check the attributes for them. Quite few would most likely come up with the attributes of System, Read Only, or both. Such conditions would quite possibly qualify that file for the list of being UNmovable. Would it not?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:51 am 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:06 pm
Posts: 93
Image Provided I worked the code here right, or even have the right location listed for the pic I wish to show, then you folks SHOULD see a pic taken from my desktop during a recent Defrag. To be precise, it was taken using the PrtSc then paste onto MSPaint. Taken DURING the analysis . I would presume that most here are familiar with Windows Defrag and it's use of Color Coding to identify each area. Contiguous Files, Fragmented Files, Unmovable Files and such. Should you zoom in to the right end on the pic, you just might notice a portion of supposedly unmovable files in an area that they have no business being. WindowsXP keeps the unmovable files in either 1 or 2 groups. Bunched together. I would suppose this allows fairly easy access when those files are needed, and hopefully to reduce fragmentation of either files or the drive itself. Yet there they are... Check it out on your own systems. As defrag analyses the drive, portions will show up in the color of Unmovable Files. And when the analysis is complete, that same section will THEN beshown only in the color denoting FRAGMENTED files. Yet everyone keeps wanting to tell me that Unmovable Files simply CANNOT be fragmented...


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:54 am 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:06 pm
Posts: 93
It would appear that I missed something on adding an image. But the URL listed there can be used to reach the pic anyway. So check it out and run some tests of your own.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:27 pm 
8086
8086

Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 7:14 pm
Posts: 50
Location: Illinois
I was going to comment but since this is not really on topic (Education or Certification) I am going to leave this one alone.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 9:09 pm 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:06 pm
Posts: 93
itpro wrote:
I was going to comment but since this is not really on topic (Education or Certification) I am going to leave this one alone.
And how is this topic NOT on topic for this section? It DOES involve LEARNING about PC's and their workings. Although it would seem that few appreciate being asked questions they don't know the answers to aside from the standard drivel. If you know something not already mentioned, I (for 1) would appreciate seeing it. I asked the question in hopes of learning the answer. I offered a theory which DOES explain the situation, but I have no way (currently known to me) to test that theory to detrmine it's validity. So if you know something, please share it.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:35 am 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24222
Location: Granite Heaven
RABical wrote:
itpro wrote:
I was going to comment but since this is not really on topic (Education or Certification) I am going to leave this one alone.
And how is this topic NOT on topic for this section? It DOES involve LEARNING about PC's and their workings.


The forum as a whole (with the exception of the Break Room) is devoted to learning about PCs and their workings. It is subdivided into folders to organize the discussions and make them easier to find. It also ensures that people who are interested in helping people with certain aspects of PCs (programming, linux, video cards, watercooling, etc.) will easily find the discussions that are in their area of expertise.

This folder is clearly marked for discussion of education and certifications for IT and IT-related industries. Your discussion belongs in the Windows Parlour (for the windows specific discussion of file fragmentation) or perhaps in the programming section (for discussion of file systems and how they work). Either of those folders would be appropriate depending on which direction you were hoping the discussion would go.

Quote:
Although it would seem that few appreciate being asked questions they don't know the answers to aside from the standard drivel. If you know something not already mentioned, I (for 1) would appreciate seeing it. I asked the question in hopes of learning the answer. I offered a theory which DOES explain the situation, but I have no way (currently known to me) to test that theory to detrmine it's validity. So if you know something, please share it.


Haven't you figured out that being pissy just makes people ignore your questions? Or that attacking people is not an effective method of argumentation? When you do, you'll find that you get far more help and prompt far more effective discussions.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:34 pm 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:06 pm
Posts: 93
"Haven't you figured out that being pissy just makes people ignore your questions? Or that attacking people is not an effective method of argumentation? When you do, you'll find that you get far more help and prompt far more effective discussions." As of so far, I have 'Attacked' no one. On the other hand, I suppose having your same old tired lines poked full of holes might appear as an attack to those with no real knowledge and no desire to learn. I have offered valid tests which, while they do not PROVE my theory, they DO support it. As for my question being 'Windows Specific' or somesuch... Fragmentation is a valid question across ALL platforms. And those platforms which make use of Virtual Memory, which is true of most any which use a GUI (Graphical User Interface) are especially prone to it. I make VALID, VERIFIABLE points, and offer VALID, VERIFIABLE tests which support those points, only to be told that I know nothing of which I speak. Yet you wish to make accusations of 'Attacking' others? Just who is being atacked???


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24222
Location: Granite Heaven
RABical wrote:
As of so far, I have 'Attacked' no one. On the other hand, I suppose having your same old tired lines poked full of holes might appear as an attack to those with no real knowledge and no desire to learn.


That is an attack. I've read this thread and the only person who demonstrates 'no desire to learn' is you.

Quote:
I have offered valid tests which, while they do not PROVE my theory, they DO support it. As for my question being 'Windows Specific' or somesuch... Fragmentation is a valid question across ALL platforms.


... which is why I suggested the topic would be handled differently in different folders.

Quote:
And those platforms which make use of Virtual Memory, which is true of most any which use a GUI (Graphical User Interface) are especially prone to it. I make VALID, VERIFIABLE points, and offer VALID, VERIFIABLE tests which support those points, only to be told that I know nothing of which I speak.


You've been told that because your posts are erroneous. You've been shown how, and why .. and all the questions that you asked initially have been answered to death.

I also enjoy the way that you completely ignored the fact that you posted this in the wrong folder. You were told that, and you responded with an insulting 'argument' in favour of this folder. Again, you were wrong and now you just ignore it.

Quote:
Yet you wish to make accusations of 'Attacking' others? Just who is being atacked???


Everyone who tried to address your questions in a manner that you'd understand.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:04 pm 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24222
Location: Granite Heaven
You say you haven't attacked anyone. I've just skimmed through your posts since page one and cut and paste these for you:

Quote:
Or else it's just a matter of no one here KNOWS the answer but lacks the courage to admit it.

But feel free to keep trying, I'll be happy to let you know if you ever come up with something new...

Fly, I'll look at your book offering. Although you might consider reading it yourself before you suggest it to others.

And after you actually read that book you recommend so highly, you just might realize that I have never left the topic thread in the slightest.

Do your own homework before you start assigning it to others...

Just what style of Cracker Jacks did you get your certification from? Because I guess I've been looking in the wrong boxes.

From the looks and content of your replies here Fly, I can only figure that I've run into yet another Deadend.

Before you post agian, please bring a brain. Even if you have to go borrow one. I despise having a battle of wits with unarmed opponents.


This next quote demonstrates that the person having difficulty understanding file use and fragmentation is you. If you think that you have a question about a very basic file handling routine that MS and IBM can not answer, despite having written those routines, you need to sit down and think about it a little bit more.

Quote:
I've asked this same question to those at Microsoft, also at IBM. I've even gone to various Hard drive manufacturers. And all I ever get is the exact same old tired lines.


If you don't think those are attacks, you should really consider going to a different forum. Continuing with this attitude will get you banned. If that doesn't concern you, consider that most of the users of this forum will ignore threads that are filled with angry rhetoric and quasi-flames. You won't get the answer you are looking for because most will just ignore you based on your attitude to those who are trying to interact with you.

Now .. to return to your question: read-only files can absolutely become fragmented. A defrag program has the rights to move those files, and so do other system utilities. What they can not do is change the file's content. 'Read-only' means 'do not change the content of this file.' It does not mean 'Do not move'. It is somewhat misleading. A read-only file might be moved if you change the directory structure, for example, if the file handler deems it would be more efficiently placed elsewhere on the disk.

Imagine you have a 1 meg file that is 'read-only'. When it is written to the disk, it might be written in 5 chunks. If the disk is defragmented, that file can (and hopefully will) be moved so that it is contiguous.

At one point, you commented that an mp3 file that is being read from disk may also exist in the VM at that time. It will not. Even Microsoft is capable of writing code that will not duplicate data to the same medium. The data will be moved from the disk to RAM and then the cache for processing .. but it will not be duplicated on the same medium. That is a waste and completely useless for obvious reasons.

The VM might be used to hold the decompressed audio data. This is obviously different than the data in the mp3 file and is thus not a duplication.

You mentioned that files become fragmented even when the PC is 'idle'. If the PC is displaying anything on the screen, it is not 'idle' ... it is processing the image being displayed. It is calculating how long until it has to shut down various devices to save power. It is counting down the time. It might be monitoring network connections. It is monitoring hardware health and monitoring temperatures. 'Idle' is a strictly relative term.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 11:15 am 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:06 pm
Posts: 93
Does or does not the title for this forum state, "Education & Certification"? Does or does not education have a pretty good deal to do with the process of Learning? For that matter, just where in that title does it state specifically about being dedicated for nothing but IT and IT related? And if there really IS another section here which more aptly covers this topic, why was this not mentioned at the start? And it just so happens that this specific area is the ONLY section whih specifically lists EDUCATION anywhere in it's title. Fragmentation is NOT a Windows Specific item. It happens in ALL platforms and with ALL O/S's.

You seem quite taken with the term 'Erroneous'. Defined as "erroneous \i-ROH-nee-us\, adjective
Containing or characterized by error; as, "erroneous conclusions." :http://dictionary.reference.com/wordoftheday/archive/1999/09/26.html Yet none here or elsewhere have shown any error on my part nor in my thinking. To be disgustingly precise, this next quote from yourself, in your infinite wisdom, would appear to be agreeing with both my stated theory AND my analogy of same.


"Now .. to return to your question: read-only files can absolutely become fragmented. A defrag program has the rights to move those files, and so do other system utilities. What they can not do is change the file's content. 'Read-only' means 'do not change the content of this file.' It does not mean 'Do not move'. It is somewhat misleading. A read-only file might be moved if you change the directory structure, for example, if the file handler deems it would be more efficiently placed elsewhere on the disk."

As for any posible error on my part concerning the workings of FAT and assorted File Systems. I've even gone so far as to supply the source of what info I have on them. And I stand quite firm that they are ALL intended for one specific primary purpose. The only real differences between them being how efficiently they accomplish that task along with any added features they might offer in the process. http://www.pcnineoneone.com/howto/filesystems1.html

"At one point, you commented that an mp3 file that is being read from disk may also exist in the VM at that time. It will not. Even Microsoft is capable of writing code that will not duplicate data to the same medium. The data will be moved from the disk to RAM and then the cache for processing .. but it will not be duplicated on the same medium. That is a waste and completely useless for obvious reasons." The file in question will still be located in the exact same location as it held prior to having been read into active memory. It's listed location in the FAT table will have changed and show the previous location as being available for use by other files to be written to the disk. If no other file is written to that disk before the system is finished with the specific file, it can then be WRITTEN right back to the same location it previously held so long as it has not been changed so as to require more allocation units then is available at that location. If this happens, the file in question will then become fragmented. I've explained this before, and your own comments would appear to agree fully with my explanation. Yet you also appear to claim that this same explanation proves the fallacy of my theory and analogy?

You certainly don't need any insults nor attacks from my lowly uneducated self. You appear to be doing a fine job all on your own of showing a clear lack of coherent thought and knowledge.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:18 pm 
Sharptooth
Sharptooth
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 1:17 pm
Posts: 397
Location: Fullerton, CA
RABical, your "arguments" are insulting. You come here to "learn", but refuse to acknowledge anything anyone tells you as the truth and make sharp satements directed back to them. You claim to have spoken to people at IBM, Microsoft and hard drive manufacturers, but do not believe them because they, as apparently everyone here, all give you the same "tired, old lines". Perhaps these "tired, old lines" are the truth?

File fragmentation happens. It can measurably affect performance when too much fragmentation occurs. There are tools supplied my Microsoft and others to counteract this fragmentation. Files can become fragmented. Defragging utilities help to restore them to their natural state.

There is no mystery behind fragmentation. The answers have been stated. It happens when files are created, deleted and moved. OS's use the next available blocks when writing new files and modifying current ones. There is no reason for so many people (employees of Microsoft, IBM included) to lie to you about it. You have punched no holes in the other posters' "theories" (read: fact). This thread probably belongs in the Hardware Haven forum. All you have done is irritate people. Go away.

P.S. I'm usually nice to people. You piss me off with your comments.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:28 pm 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:06 pm
Posts: 93
That I recall, I've not accused anyone of lying. Not unless you count not being willing to admit to a lack of knowledge as a lie. And if my comens are pising you off, at least you do appear to be THINKING as opposed to just spouting the same lines as the rest. For every so called 'Well Learned' person that claims Fgamentation to be nothing of concer. Most of which claim that it never has been a concern and is only a scare tactic to get folks to spend $$$ on so called fixes that actually do nothing. There is yet another person who says that it IS a concern and CAN cause a reduction in system efficiency and ability. And BOTH groups are only too happy to suggest their own personal preferred program, at a discount of course because you got it through THEM, in order to solve this problem for so ever so quickly and easily. When I see a Spade, I tend to call it a Spade. If I should happen to see a Rake, why then I shall call it a Rake. And when I see those whose supposed job it is to know what they are doing and talking about acting like fools by telling me I know nothing of which I speak. Yet in the same breath, or sentence as it were, stating that they agree fully with what I am saying. Then by all means I call that person a FOOL who only PRETENDS to know much of anything beyond the BIG WORDS to scare 'Normal People' into thinking they deserve those big $$$ for their advice.
Fragmentation is an ongoing occurance in PC's. It happens every day to greater or lesser degrees, depending of course on the use to which that specific PC is put. Understanding EXACTLY how it works is the first step in finding an actual solution. Rather like having a headache and taking an aspirin. If you know precisely what caused that headache, and you avoid whatever that was (such as do not stand up quickly while underneath a cabinet), well then there is one less headache for you to be concerned with. Relieving the symptom is all well and good. But finding the actual CURE would seem ever so much better. I believe the term is Preventative Medicine. It's why you wash your hands or brush your teeth.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:44 pm 
8086
8086

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:06 pm
Posts: 93
From what I've seen here so far. There really aren't any people here actually interested in learning about how PC's work. You appear to be only interested in cashing in on other poeple's lack of knowledge. I asked a valid question, yet am told the question holds no merit. I offer a possible answer for that question, and am told that I know nothing and that my theory is 100% false. Yet am also told at the same time that at least SOME of you who tell me I'm wrong actually AGREE with my theory 100%. This makes it pretty darned obvious that YOU PEOPLE simply don't know anything but aren't willing to admit it. And claiming anything to the contrary would constitute FRAUD. So please feel free to list my name in the BANNED section. Because to borrow the line used by Jipstyle (an appropriate name if ever there was one, because the only thing He/She appears to actually know is how to JIP people)


YOU PEOPLE ARE SIMPLY NOT WORTH MY TIME AND EFFORT. You don't really know much of anything, yet you lack even the basic courage to admit it.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 2:21 pm 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24222
Location: Granite Heaven
RABical wrote:
YOU PEOPLE ARE SIMPLY NOT WORTH MY TIME AND EFFORT. You don't really know much of anything, yet you lack even the basic courage to admit it.


I admit it. There really isn't any reason for you to come back. Why waste your time?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 1:42 pm 
[Team Member]
[Team Member]
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:07 am
Posts: 1491
Location: 127.0.0.1
Jipstyle wrote:
... read-only files can absolutely become fragmented. A defrag program has the rights to move those files, and so do other system utilities. What they can not do is change the file's content. 'Read-only' means 'do not change the content of this file.' It does not mean 'Do not move'. It is somewhat misleading. A read-only file might be moved if you change the directory structure, for example, if the file handler deems it would be more efficiently placed elsewhere on the disk.


Not that I want to get involved in this quagmire (stop smirking Jip, you know how I like to poke the Libs), but an easy/prime example of what Jip said is;
Code:
mysystem # mv /boot/vmlinuz /mnt/sda5/opt


As Jip says, when a file is read-only or a "system" file it is in relation to changing the data of the file, and has nothing to do with excercising commands on the file (moving it, renaming it (which is really no different than moving it), compressing it, decompressing it...the list goes on) and its location on the platter/drive. Just reading/accessing a file can change its characteristics which could affect its size/placement.

;) Jip should have brought some more of his Linux experience into this...


Next, as another "easy" example, I can demonstrate "true" idling of a partition where absolutely NO defragmentation will occur. Give me two seconds and I'll type;
Code:
mysystem # umount /dev/sda2


Now this little demonstration has two purposes. One, this partition is a part of a hard drive where the platter is still spinning, so it is active, but it is not changing in any fashion on a system-level. The drive is incapable of fragmenting because the OS is no longer interacting with it. Therefore, I have provided an example where a drive is idling and not fragmenting. Your criteria never mentioned that the OS had to be able to interact with the drive, simply that the system sit idle;

RABical wrote:
...allow that system to sit IDLE for a day or 2


I can remount the drive, and the drive will be in the same state as it was previously. I could run my system indefinitely with the partition unmounted and have the same result.

heh, I'm chuckling because there is more...

Second, I forgot to mention that the /dev/sda2 drive was an NTFS filesystem (redundant, I know), and being the dumb bunny that I am, I didn't build NTFS write abilities into my kernel (its flakey anyway). But anywho, this particular partition contains about 30GB of MP3s, OGGs, AVIs, MPEG-4s and God knows what else I've spirited away there...all I know is that after I remount it, all day and all night for 4 months solid I play a random rotation of a bunch of these files running in the background. Sometimes I pick up my headphones and listen, mostly I don't. Guess what? My filesystem (and that is really what we are talking about here) doesn't get fragmented. The reason is simple, the files are truely immutable in the present environment. This just gets back to the misunderstanding about what is an unchangable file (what is bandied about as "system files" and "read only files") and what's not changable by the user OR by the OS *at that time*.

Finally, one last tidbit. I can build my system and then take away its swap/paging filesystem. In an OS like Linux, which has decent memory utilization, I can play music or movies for years at a time and not see a performance hit. Hell, I'd get scared if I saw my swap get pinged now as it is. I don't think it uses the swap even when I'm folding...

Oh well, I think this was all a miscommunication. Somebody probably didn't understand the difference between an OS and hardware is my guess /sarcasm. An OS is like my wife at dinner, even though her plate is full of food, she'll still reach over and try to get a bite of my dinner...Winblows likes to "touch" (not in the *nix sense) files just to make sure they are still there...at least that's how I like to think of it, YMMV.

To answer your question (original), my supposition is that the OS "checks" (for lack of a better term) the existance and state of files. This might be for recovery purposes, maybe for sanity checks, maybe to see if another filesystem changed the data, or maybe just to (re)verify tables. If the OS is running, there are probably processes running in the background, and if there are processes running, then the state of the OS is dynamic (meaning its changing) and as such it probably does housekeeping chores to make sure that its memory, tables and I/O are all aware of where the data starts and stops (which is what's really important or you'll get your chocolate in my peanut-butter!)...

I had $0.02, so I thought I'd throw it in...

happy happy joy joy.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 1:59 pm 
[Team Member]
[Team Member]
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:07 am
Posts: 1491
Location: 127.0.0.1
Hmmm, I forgot to make something perfectly clear...I'm no expert, I just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night...no wait, that wasn't it....

Oh yeah, now I remember. My point was that being able to read from a filesystem and being able to write to a filesystem are two distinct capabilities, unassociated with one another. I think that the OP wanted to know why a system could see a change in file states/placement when no apparent activity was occurring on those files. I don't believe that this is question for hardware manufacturers, but is most likely going to reside with the OS developers. The OS is not sitting idle, even though the user is not doing "anything". As referenced above, as long as the system is available for input from the user, it is in flux. I'm sure some of our software gurus could give an indication of some of the activities that the OS might be partaking in during those "idle" times, which might explain the changing file states.


Top
  Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group