Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Larry on August 22, 2009, 10:30:34 PM
-
It really has nothing to do with AH but I thought Id post it here. About a month ago my Disk Defragmenter started acting up. It would let me defrag any of my (E:) drives (thumb drives) but when I try to defrag or analyze (C:) a pop up shows up saying "Disk Defragmenter could not start".
Any tips?
-
Is that the built in defragmenter or one you downloaded to use?
What happens when you force a scandisk on reboot?
-
do you have DCOM disabled in your service console? without it defrag cannot run on your hard drive
-
Is that the built in defragmenter or one you downloaded to use?
Yes.
What happens when you force a scandisk on reboot?
Dont really know what you mean by 'scandisk'.
do you have DCOM disabled in your service console? without it defrag cannot run on your hard drive
Its enabled.
-
Scandisk...checkdisk...it's a built in feature of Windows that scans the drive for errors. Open "my computer" then right click no that drive...go to "properties" and find the tab labeled "tools"...then click on "error checking"...it will take a while depending on the size of your hard drive.
-
"Windows was unable to complete the disk check"
I'm guessing that is bad.
Might be time for a reformat.
-
you don't have screensaver enabled do you?
sometimes windows screensaver when enabled, will make the windows OS disk defragmenter not start, keep stopping or starting over , will do the same for scandisk
if the Windows Screen Saver option is not enabled, then you might have a problem......
you might want to try getting a different disk defragmenter program too.... I myself use, the one that comes in my "Paragon HDD Manager™ 2009 Pro" software.......it goes in to a DEEP InDepth Defrag that defrags the system before the OS loads up to the desktop..... very thorough
my 2 cents.....
-
"Windows was unable to complete the disk check"
I'm guessing that is bad.
Might be time for a reformat.
Hmmm...that's not good for sure...could be a bad windows install or a disk going bad...did that error message come up after the restart? Did it even start doing a check disk?
TC has a good idea...I use auslogistics disk defragmenter...the one TC uses is a lot more heavy duty but the auslogistics works well for normal use.
Try a different disk defragmenter and if that blows out on you..."disk read error"...or something along that line...new drive...if any other error messages come up, reload the drive.
Side note, TC with screen savers or power management on, disk defragementer will at least start.
...when I try to defrag or analyze (C:) a pop up shows up saying "Disk Defragmenter could not start".
-
Side note, TC
thx gyrene, sometimes is not wise to post as you bout to go to bed...... completely missed that........ yep it should start, it will just never finish or keeps starting over....
prob go a bad sector or as said above disk going bad......... ( unless you have yourself tinkered around with the services & processes, then it might be something as a simple restoring to an earlier point? )
-
Sounds like a virus affecting disk tools to work on the system drive. Also you might want to provide a dxdiag so we can verify certain memory configurations.
-
Disk defragmenting is generally a waste of time. 5% increase in load times at max and zero affect on gameplay.
-
Disk defragmenting is generally a waste of time. 5% increase in load times at max and zero affect on gameplay.
Hmmm I must have faulty systems...my load times decrease notably especially if it's been more than 6 months and when I clean and defrag the registry.
-
Hmmm I must have faulty systems...my load times decrease notably especially if it's been more than 6 months and when I clean and defrag the registry.
I can wait 0.5 seconds longer without troubleshooting defrag problems for hours like the OP. ;)
-
If you have to "troubleshoot" defrag issues then something is wrong.
<S>
-
If you have to "troubleshoot" defrag issues then something is wrong.
<S>
Well obviously but to add insult to injury, by posting this we already spent way more time than defragging would have saved him.
-
0.5 seconds doesnt mean a whole lot when youre talking about boot time......
however it could mean a heck of a lot if your AH installation is fragmented all over your drive even on the fastest of drives
imagine flying into a furball and your drive has to search in 20 different places to find the different skins and load them....... or sounds for that matter....... then read 200 different posts about stuttering in furballs and think about it for a minute
-
0.5 seconds doesnt mean a whole lot when youre talking about boot time......
however it could mean a heck of a lot if your AH installation is fragmented all over your drive even on the fastest of drives
imagine flying into a furball and your drive has to search in 20 different places to find the different skins and load them....... or sounds for that matter....... then read 200 different posts about stuttering in furballs and think about it for a minute
LOL...good one...glad you brought it up.
But then according to MrRipley:
Disk defragmenting is generally a waste of time. 5% increase in load times at max and zero affect on gameplay.
I'd rather do what I've been doing since Windows 95 came out...defrag...and not have to wonder why my read/write speeds went to poop on a fast drive.
-
Funny but I never have stutters despite never bothering to defragment.
Ok, I had stutters during beta but defragging would have done nothing to that.
Generally speaking if your hd loads anything during fighting AND causing visible pauses something is seriously wrong. Something that no amount of defragging will ever fix.
-
Disk defragmenting is generally a waste of time. 5% increase in load times at max and zero affect on gameplay.
I haven't measured the effect on AH2 specifically, but this is certainly not true for Windows and Windows apps in general. You can lose a LOT of performance if you don't defrag when it needs it.
Personally, I defrag after every time I patch windows, or update drivers, or patch whatever software I'm using. Do it frequently and it doesn't take long, and then it isn't even an inconvenience.
-
Funny but I never have stutters despite never bothering to defragment.
In all previous versions of (when we still got a cache), I experienced some stutter after each major update, because the new built cache was heavily fragmented.
Defragmenting invariably fixed that.
-
In all previous versions of (when we still got a cache), I experienced some stutter after each major update, because the new built cache was heavily fragmented.
Defragmenting invariably fixed that.
same here
-
My personal opinnion is that defragmenting is a typical thing that's blown out of proportion. Unless you have a really horrible system that thrashes the harddrive fragmentation will be no performance problem in daily life.
Slow I/O combined with virus checks is the main culprit and the defragmenting is just a noneffective band-aid in attempt to fix it.
-
My personal opinnion is that defragmenting is a typical thing that's blown out of proportion. Unless you have a really horrible system that thrashes the harddrive fragmentation will be no performance problem in daily life.
Slow I/O combined with virus checks is the main culprit and the defragmenting is just a noneffective band-aid in attempt to fix it.
These days, it's true that defragmentation has a significantly reduced impact over what it once did - multitasking systems tend to read disks in small "fragments" regardless of whether the contents of individual files are placed in sequence or not.
However, files that are still read sequentially by a single threaded linear processes can easily be affected by defragmentation, so people still often see marked improvement performing some tasks - even though other tasks are entirely unaffected.
But that's neither here nor there - regardless of your opinion of what you think the "problem" is, a system is what it is, and virus checkers are what they are - and your combination of hardware and software may be in a completely different class than a system that another player must still use, due to financial or other constraints. And as everyone who does computer systems knows, doing a few things - even if they each only help a little - can add up to a remarkable difference over not doing anything at all.
So regardless of how little defragmentation seems to help you, to tell others that doing so WONT or CANT help them - and then blame their hardware or software of being insufficient if it does - is kind of silly in my honest opinion - and in many instances, you are likely to be entirely wrong.
Defragmentation costs nothing to perform except a bit of time (which can easily be when you aren't using the system).
You seem to be almost on a crusade to stamp out defragmentation, is there a reason for this?
<S>
P.S. By the way - Larry certainly wouldn't be the first person to potentially detect a disk problem far earlier than he otherwise might have through defragmentation - there is something to be said for a process that reads through most if not all of the contents of the hard disk every once in a while, and reports any problems that it finds.
<S>
-
Or one could say that unnecessary wear and tear caused by constant defragmenting gives a premature death to hardware.. :x
Defragging was a big thing pre XP and ntfs. Post xp and ntfs the need is greatly reduced.
You're right that many people struggle with hardware and try to salvage what's possible through defragging. But the grim reality is that what they really need is not defragging but invest 80 bucks to a spanking new harddrive. And maybe 20 bucks to another stick of ram - to stop unnecessary swapping from happening in the first place.
Here's a researched opinnion (tested hardware/several defraggers)
"Don't waste your money or time"
"Disk defragmentation did nothing to improve the performance of our machine."
PC Magazine, June 2008 issue, page 62
-
Sorry Ripley...but I'm agree on one point and disagree on another point.
Just on the assumption that you understand how fragmentation occurs on a hard drive and that it is a constantly occurring process which occurs at different rates with every system (even Unix) depending on typical usage.
Yes frequent defragmentation procedures can potentially cause premature wear on a hard drive...and there are some aftermarket utilities that put the drive in constant defragment mode none of which people should use...but the "premature wear" issue is similar to the MTBF (mean time before failure)...it is not an absolute.
Investing in a better hard drive...adding RAM...etc...does not stop the fragmentation process...open any application (especially Microsoft and Adobe)...use the application to create and manage files...and your hard drive will experience fragmentation...this also applies to installing/removing applications.
That article that you quote from PC Magazine was in regard to a disk defragmentation program that promised better performance if used according to the developers specs...and it did not say that defragmentation was not necessary at all...and what's totally funny about that article is it has been contradicted repeatedly by other authors who write for PC Magazine and it's sister publications, since 2001...as well as real world hands on experts at Tech Republic who frequently advise people to defragment their hard drives.
Personally, I don't use the Windows defrag process (it's based on the freeware version of Diskeeper)...there are a lot of good on demand disk defragmenters available that do a better job...and I don't recommend defragmenting more than once every 3 to 6 months unless you are doing a lot of install/remove applications or creating/deleting files on a daily basis...but that's just from my personal experience.
-
Fragmentation happens, yes. I defrag max once per year if that.
I never suffer from performance problems, especially while playing AH. How is that possible? If fragmentation would be the end-all performance killer as people describe it I should be having big trouble, no?
The truth is that with a modern 7200rpm and large cache drive you will not notice any real world difference with 1 years non-defrag use and regularly defraged drive. If you use ancient 4200rpm drives or such then you're already pooched by default. No defrag will speed it up even to the level of non-defraged new drive.
IMO people who think they need defrag in reality have too low ram so their hd swaps constantly leading to larger fragmentation among slow performance. But the answer to their problem is not defrag it's upgrading hardware. Fragmentation is a symptom, you don't cure the problem by curing the symptoms.
-
hilarious all that and nobody gave you any command to run
open run type command
black screen
type chkdsk/F
if irt does not let you right click c drive properties ,tools ,error checking , check off both check boxes
apply yes to after systyem reboots and reboot
this will run for a good time , let it go
After it is done reboot and run defrag
-
hilarious all that and nobody gave you any command to run
open run type command
black screen
type chkdsk/F
if irt does not let you right click c drive properties ,tools ,error checking , check off both check boxes
apply yes to after systyem reboots and reboot
this will run for a good time , let it go
After it is done reboot and run defrag
:huh I made the assumption he ran it and got the error message:
"Windows was unable to complete the disk check"
I'm guessing that is bad.
Might be time for a reformat.
Never did ask him at what point he got that message...good call Oceans.
-
:huh I made the assumption he ran it and got the error message:
Never did ask him at what point he got that message...good call Oceans.
No Problem
Being in IT I always look for the simple things first
He could always download an af6er market defragger and that should fix the problem
-
Fragmentation happens, yes. I defrag max once per year if that.
I never suffer from performance problems, especially while playing AH. How is that possible? If fragmentation would be the end-all performance killer as people describe it I should be having big trouble, no?
The truth is that with a modern 7200rpm and large cache drive you will not notice any real world difference with 1 years non-defrag use and regularly defraged drive. If you use ancient 4200rpm drives or such then you're already pooched by default. No defrag will speed it up even to the level of non-defraged new drive.
IMO people who think they need defrag in reality have too low ram so their hd swaps constantly leading to larger fragmentation among slow performance. But the answer to their problem is not defrag it's upgrading hardware. Fragmentation is a symptom, you don't cure the problem by curing the symptoms.
I have been in IT since the early 70's from keypunch cards to the present and the same old saying just applies even more today
A LITTLE BIT OF KNOWLEDGE CAN BE A DANGEROUS THING
Use the simple tools to find the problemsand/or discover upcoming problems.
A heavily used pc will always benefit from a defrag.
-
A heavily used pc will always benefit from a defrag.
Very marginally, especially due to disk i/o _not_ being used 99% time during gaming. Well, unless the system starts to swap which means your performance is obliterated immediately anyway.
Funny that you mentioned the 'little bit of knowledge' since I've fixed countless client's problems through pointing them in the right direction after they've tried hopelessly to defrag untill their disks burn red.
-
Entertainingly enough, an idle Windows system defrags itself along with running the Indexing Service if they're both enabled. :rolleyes: Makes me wonder if Ripley defrags more than he thinks.
-
Entertainingly enough, an idle Windows system defrags itself along with running the Indexing Service if they're both enabled. :rolleyes: Makes me wonder if Ripley defrags more than he thinks.
Entertainingly enough I run 17 processes. That means no.
If you want to waste your time for neglible performance gains - defrag all you like. But it will never be the answer to your _real_ performance bottlenecks. You're polishing a turd so to speak.
-
What does processes have to do with it? The auto-defrag isn't in a process, as far as I remember. I disabled it a very long time ago and don't remember how.
-
What does processes have to do with it? The auto-defrag isn't in a process, as far as I remember. I disabled it a very long time ago and don't remember how.
You ask that question and you seriously think you have any stand in this conversation? Oh puhleeze.
-
Why would I need "stand" in this conversation? What should be friendly banter shouldn't need "stand."
I went back and searched out how to disable it. It's a registry entry and has nothing to do with processes. Amazingly enough, Windows does it on its own without having a process idling around waiting for it, it seems.
-
Why would I need "stand" in this conversation? What should be friendly banter shouldn't need "stand."
I went back and searched out how to disable it. It's a registry entry and has nothing to do with processes. Amazingly enough, Windows does it on its own without having a process idling around waiting for it, it seems.
It's an option in a common tool called 'tweakui' for example, no need to edit registry manually. What I meant is that I have fair knowledge on how my computer works and that the prefetcher does a partial defrag as part of its process. Since windows contains built in functions for basic defragging there is really no need to mess with it manually anymore.
If the filesystem doesn't work on it's own you have a problem somewhere else than not having defragged.
-
1st hope Larry got his system/Hd working........
2nd, yes WinXP and newer is far less to have fragmentation problems than older OS systems.......unless......
like me, I have 4 HD's on my most used PC system........and I do alot of DVD burning & Music CD burning on one particular 320 gig SATA II HD.... this HD will become more than 25 to 30 % fragmented in under 30 days , all depending on how much burning I am doing.......
while the other 3 HD's will and most times remains under 2 to 3 % fragmented on any given day of the year when checked......
I also use the same HD that I use for my DVD's & CD's for all of my autocad work on blueprints and HVAC duct design...... so that one particular HD has alot of files being made, moved, deleted, etc....
so MrRipley is pretty much correct in his opinion of todays systems and hardware........all depending on the personal use of such hardware/system.....
edit: the tweakui, Ripley mentions, I remember as MS tech's "Power Toys" back when Windows 3.11 for work groups thru Win2000 .........have not looked for such a tool/power toy in a long while .......no need for it really.....