Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
> My last answer to you: I did not say that defragmentation will not
> increase performance (sometimes). I did say, that it is wrong to work
> on the problem by manually defragment the HD. Defragmentation is very
> shortliving and can even degrade performance. The real solution for
> such a situation is a bigger volume  and a simple copy of the HD. 

Oh, so it's that large volumes don't fragment files?  Large files don't 
still get broken into "fragments" and stored at different physical 
locations on your HD's?  Wow, your  HD's must be huge!  And your OS so 
incredibly smart that it never breaks a file into segments, regardless 
of where space is available...  Amazing!

So, in the past 30 years all you have done is purchased new HD's instead 
of defragging if necessary?  I don't think my employer would go for that 
on our 350gb RAID-5 server.  They'd much prefer I defrag it.

You continue to speak in black and white terms.  Defragging is 
short-lived?  That only depends on how you read/write/delete data to 
it.  That depends solely based on its usage - and the performance you 
are willing to subjugate yourself to.

This is silly.  None of this has any direct relation to the topic - so I 
really hope that was your last answer.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Assp-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user

Reply via email to