Absolutely. Performance is seriously reduced on a highly fragmented
drive.
Early on Microsoft's company line on NTFS was that its' performance did
not suffer from fragmentation. Notice that now Microsoft includes the
defragment utility in 2000 and up.
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2001 4:56 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Defrag: is it necessary for NTFS?
Defragging is necessary and can easily be proven.
Anyone on this list who has defragged a heavily fragmented
disk/partition can attest to this.
==============================================================
ASB - http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/?File=~MoreInfo.TXT
==============================================================
"If it jams -- force it. It needed replacing anyway."
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ivan von Winlamerberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2001 5:46 PM
>To: NT System Admin Issues
>Subject: RE: Defrag: is it necessary for NTFS?
>
>
>
>--- "Andrew S. Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> File fragmentation has a negative impact on performance, because
>> it
>> makes reading files much much harder.
>>
>> Regular defragmentation allows the drive and the OS to make
>> better use
>> of caching for file reads, among other things.
>
>OK, thank you. This would be true for very old types of
>HDDs/controllers/linear_geometry and FS. Then NTFS wouldn't be a
>journalling FS in the modern sense, prolly a top level layer. In
>any event all I need to know: does it need defragmentation really
>or just to boost economy? I really doubt.
>
http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
