🚀 go-pugleaf

Your best (and I think only) option is Diskeeper from Executive Software
(http://www.execsoft.com).  They have a demo version to download.  We run it
on ours, and it does a great job--although it does run into problems if the
HD on the server gets almost full, but that's another story.

(And remember, crossposting is considered bad Netiquette, just FYI :)


Franz Graf <00XRay@ThePentagon.com> wrote in message
<357C2FE0.1D44F1D5@ThePentagon.com>...
>Hello,
>
>I've seen some HDD-defragtools for NT Workstation. But does anyone know
>where I can get a defragtool for NT SERVER?
>And Do I need do defrag a NTFS Partition or is it so advanced that i do
>not need this (i almost don't dare to believe this but well.)?
>
>So, if anyone has a defragtool for NT4-SERVER or knows where to get one,
>please mail me!
>Thanx in advance
>--
>Spamprotection: remove the "00" in my e-mailadress to mail me!!!
>--
>written by: Franz Graf
>WChat: Locked
>ICQ UIN: 370237
>Webpage: http://www.ThePentagon.com/Locked
>my 3D ART:
>http://www.FutureByte.net/homepages/stuff/3dart/3dartwork.html
>

Yes you do need to defrag a NTFS partition.

Either Nortons or Diskeeper will work.

The Diskeeper is faster but  the Norton's Utilitiies comes with a program to
recover files the users have deleted off the server data directories.

We have our Norton's defrag in the early morning hours on the servers.

The latest version of Diskeeper can also defrag directories, which Norton
reportedly cannot do.

Ken Collins
KenCollins@KenCollins.com
http://www.KenCollins.com

Michael Bonnett wrote in message ...
>Yes you do need to defrag a NTFS partition.
>
>Either Nortons or Diskeeper will work.
>
>The Diskeeper is faster but  the Norton's Utilitiies comes with a program
to
>recover files the users have deleted off the server data directories.
>

NTFS should perform a defrag as part of it's normal process functioning. 
This is a major concept of an NTFS.  The only time you would need a defrag
program would be if you choose to use the FAT instead of NTFS.  I could be
wrong about this.  However, the information regarding NTFS should be
correct according to my training on NT.

Larry E. Hayes
Manager
Ozzy E-Commerce Solutions L.L.C.
(253)631-7818
http://icat.wolfe.net/ozzy/
14822 S.E. 309th St
Kent, WA 98042


Franz Graf <00XRay@ThePentagon.com> wrote in article
<357C2FE0.1D44F1D5@ThePentagon.com>...
> Hello,
> 
> I've seen some HDD-defragtools for NT Workstation. But does anyone know
> where I can get a defragtool for NT SERVER?
> And Do I need do defrag a NTFS Partition or is it so advanced that i do
> not need this (i almost don't dare to believe this but well.)?
> 
> So, if anyone has a defragtool for NT4-SERVER or knows where to get one,
> please mail me!
> Thanx in advance
> -- 
> Spamprotection: remove the "00" in my e-mailadress to mail me!!!
> --
> written by: Franz Graf
> WChat: Locked
> ICQ UIN: 370237
> Webpage: http://www.ThePentagon.com/Locked
> my 3D ART:
> http://www.FutureByte.net/homepages/stuff/3dart/3dartwork.html
> 

In article <01bd9510$4c00d420$0100007f@darland>, Larry E. Hayes wrote:

> NTFS should perform a defrag as part of it's normal process functioning. 
> This is a major concept of an NTFS.
>
It doesn't.

> However, the information regarding NTFS should be
> correct according to my training on NT
>
Good chance to get your money back <g>

Regards, Helmuth

 Commit yourself: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/Homepages/babuwi/solidar.htm
 Home page: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Helmuth_Schutzeich

Whoah... hold on a minute here...

On 11 Jun 1998 08:07:08 GMT, "Larry E. Hayes" <larryh@wolfenet.com> wrote:

>NTFS should perform a defrag as part of it's normal process functioning. 
>This is a major concept of an NTFS.  The only time you would need a defrag
Sorry, no. NT does not defragment itself while it's running. The difference that
I believe you're thinking about is that it actually "thinks" about where the
best place for a new file would be, as apposed to FAT using first available
cluster.
>program would be if you choose to use the FAT instead of NTFS.  I could be
NTFS gets worse fragmentation that FAT, since when you install to a new NTFS
partition, the size of clusters it creates are 512 bytes, which is WAYYY to
small. 2K/4K is a good size for decent performance. 
>wrong about this.  However, the information regarding NTFS should be
>correct according to my training on NT.
From who? Microsoft Public Relations? :-) [0]

Anyway, I would suggest Diskeeper (www.execsoft.com). It's an excellent tool,
and it's served me well on my workstations and servers.
>
>Larry E. Hayes
>Manager
>Ozzy E-Commerce Solutions L.L.C.
>(253)631-7818
>http://icat.wolfe.net/ozzy/
>14822 S.E. 309th St
>Kent, WA 98042
>
>
>Franz Graf <00XRay@ThePentagon.com> wrote in article
><357C2FE0.1D44F1D5@ThePentagon.com>...
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I've seen some HDD-defragtools for NT Workstation. But does anyone know
>> where I can get a defragtool for NT SERVER?
>> And Do I need do defrag a NTFS Partition or is it so advanced that i do
>> not need this (i almost don't dare to believe this but well.)?
>> 
>> So, if anyone has a defragtool for NT4-SERVER or knows where to get one,
>> please mail me!
>> Thanx in advance
>> -- 
>> Spamprotection: remove the "00" in my e-mailadress to mail me!!!
>> --
>> written by: Franz Graf
>> WChat: Locked
>> ICQ UIN: 370237
>> Webpage: http://www.ThePentagon.com/Locked
>> my 3D ART:
>> http://www.FutureByte.net/homepages/stuff/3dart/3dartwork.html
>> 

[0] No offense [1]
[1] To you at least... 

> NTFS should perform a defrag as part of it's normal process functioning. 

it doesn't... how's it supposed to do that without any defrag code?

> This is a major concept of an NTFS.  The only time you would need a defrag
> program would be if you choose to use the FAT instead of NTFS.  I could be

I don't know who came up with this idea.. probably some goon in 
marketing. NTFS seems to get as much or MORE fragmented than FAT 
partitions. In my experience anyway. 

I haven't tried many >9Gig drives/drive sets that get used a lot, so 
perhaps NTFS is ok on really big drives.

-- 
brooks

[ Anti Spam : Remove leading 'b' on brooks, and trailing 'm' on comm when 
replying to email. ]

Well the real question is not if NTFS gets fragmented, the answer to that 
is obvious. The real question is, does this fragmentation effect access 
speed as much as fragmentation of a FAT partition? 

I use Diskeeper from executive software. About three weeks ago I re-
installed NT (don't ask why) and forgot to reinstall Diskeeper. After a 
week of use I re-installed Diskeeper, the system the following morning 
(the defrag runs at night) felt noticeably faster. 

So I guess even on NTFS, fragmentation causes a slowdown. Is it as bad as 
FAT, that I do not know. 

In article <MPG.fea19ae1e524bf49896ea@news.frii.com>, bbrooks@frii.comm 
says...
> I don't know who came up with this idea.. probably some goon in 
> marketing. NTFS seems to get as much or MORE fragmented than FAT 
> partitions. In my experience anyway. 
> 
> 

-- 
Jim Vaughan
Redondo Beach, CA
ICQ 4493332
jvaughan@jps.net

On Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:43:59 -0600, bbrooks@frii.comm (Brooks) wrote:

>> NTFS should perform a defrag as part of it's normal process functioning. 
>
>it doesn't... how's it supposed to do that without any defrag code?
>
>> This is a major concept of an NTFS.  The only time you would need a defrag
>> program would be if you choose to use the FAT instead of NTFS.  I could be
>
>I don't know who came up with this idea.. probably some goon in 
>marketing. NTFS seems to get as much or MORE fragmented than FAT 
>partitions. In my experience anyway. 

The closest to this that I've heard is the opinion that a file server
doesn't need defragging because when you consider the multiple near
simultaneous requests for files from all the users, the concept of
contiguous fetching goes out the window.

(not sure I believe it anyway :-) )


...and yes...NTFS gets very fragmented.  I use Diskepper Lite.

Darryl

???..NTFS should perform a defrag as part of it's normal process       
functioning.
     This is a major concept of an NTFS.  The only time ... 
     ???????????????????????????????????

NTFS can be very bad defragmented,
and it will be not defragmented without special utility.
The best (in my opinion) is DISKEEPER by EXECUTIVE SOFTWARE
INTERNATIONAL, INC.

Larry E. Hayes wrote:
> 
> NTFS should perform a defrag as part of it's normal process functioning.
> This is a major concept of an NTFS.  The only time you would need a defrag
> program would be if you choose to use the FAT instead of NTFS.  I could be
> wrong about this.  However, the information regarding NTFS should be
> correct according to my training on NT.
> 
> Larry E. Hayes
> Manager
> Ozzy E-Commerce Solutions L.L.C.
> (253)631-7818
> http://icat.wolfe.net/ozzy/
> 14822 S.E. 309th St
> Kent, WA 98042
> 
> Franz Graf <00XRay@ThePentagon.com> wrote in article
> <357C2FE0.1D44F1D5@ThePentagon.com>...
> > Hello,
> >
> > I've seen some HDD-defragtools for NT Workstation. But does anyone know
> > where I can get a defragtool for NT SERVER?
> > And Do I need do defrag a NTFS Partition or is it so advanced that i do
> > not need this (i almost don't dare to believe this but well.)?
> >
> > So, if anyone has a defragtool for NT4-SERVER or knows where to get one,
> > please mail me!
> > Thanx in advance
> > --
> > Spamprotection: remove the "00" in my e-mailadress to mail me!!!
> > --
> > written by: Franz Graf
> > WChat: Locked
> > ICQ UIN: 370237
> > Webpage: http://www.ThePentagon.com/Locked
> > my 3D ART:
> > http://www.FutureByte.net/homepages/stuff/3dart/3dartwork.html
> >

You would think so, but there is nothing to base this assumption on.

I know of one way to (almost) guarantee a contiguous file is created on
an NTFS partition.  Make sure it is the only file on a newly created 
partition.

The are two issues here:

1. NTFS doesn't seem to have a "best-try contiguous" file creation.

2. The level of fragmentation of the available free space.  Obviously,
if your free space is chewed up in thousands of fragments, this makes
contiguous file creation less of a possibility.  

And don't rely on Diskeeper to give you an accurate accounting of
free space fragmentation.  Last time I checked (V3.0), they openly
declared they don't care how fragmented your free space is, and
the graphical representation of the free space (the blue bar) is
flawed.  You could have numerous free space fragments (holes), but the
blue bar will display as solid.

This seemed to be confirmed by their lack of a text report for
free space fragmentation.  Haven't checked it recently though.
--
Greg Askew
gba@REMOVE-THISmindspring.com

Peter wrote:
> 
> I may be missing something obvious here but surely doing a *file* copy
> must write defragged files on the destination?
> 
> >Even copying from one disk to another will not necessarily
> >copy the files in a contiguous fashion.  Neither will a backup
> >and restore of the drive.
> 
> Peter.
> 
> Return address is invalid to help stop junk mail.
> E-mail replies to zX80@digiYserve.com but
> remove the X and the Y.

bodo@interlog.com (Byron Bodo) wrote:

>In article <358351DD.5FE054B7@surfsouth.com>, kpadgett@surfsouth.com says...
>>
>>Hi all
>>
>>Absolutely right, NTFS can be fragmented.  Microsoft is buying the
>>disk keeper program to go with their NT 5.0.
>>
>>I'm pretty sure they wouldn't do that if they thought NTFS couldn't
>>be fragmented.  Studies show that is does fragment.
>>
>
>NTFS was an outgrowth of HPFS.  In contrast to HPFS, it's supposed
>to be a "journaling" file system whatever that means.  Also


It means in the event of a system crash during a change to a file,
NTFS can roll the file back to its last "complete" state.  You may
lose what was happening during the crash, but it doesn't leave the
file in a half changed (often useless) state.
-- 
_______________________
Ed Hansberry
xxxxxhans@usit.net - If you want to send me email,
you know what to do with the xxxxx.

C:\>dir /a $MFT
 Volume in drive C is System
 Volume Serial Number is 288D-AD20

 Directory of C:\

05/05/98  09:48a            20,763,648 $MFT
               1 File(s)     20,763,648 bytes
                            682,457,600 bytes free

Almost no way...

On Sun, 28 Jun 1998 11:15:43 -0400, Greg Askew <gba@REMOVE-THISmindspring.com>
wrote:

>The similarity to VMS ends at the conceptual stage.  The NT disk
>and file systems have almost no similarity at all, with the
>exception of a few hidden files at the root of an NTFS partition
>that are not viewable unless you run NTFSDOS or some other utility.

On Mon, 29 Jun 1998 02:18:29 GMT, nospam@usit.net (Ed H.) wrote:

>bodo@interlog.com (Byron Bodo) wrote:
>>NTFS was an outgrowth of HPFS.  In contrast to HPFS, it's supposed
>>to be a "journaling" file system whatever that means.  Also
>
>It means in the event of a system crash during a change to a file,
>NTFS can roll the file back to its last "complete" state.  You may
>lose what was happening during the crash, but it doesn't leave the
>file in a half changed (often useless) state.

From what I've read, NTFS does not journal changes to files, only
changes to file system metadata. This ensures that the file system is
consistent after a crash but it doesn't prevent the corruption of the
contents of a file.

-- 
John A. Limpert        Mein Luftkissenfahrzueg ist mit Aale besetzt.
johnl@Radix.Net

In article <359d93fa.494462890@news1.Radix.Net>, johnl@Radix.Net (John A. Limpert) writes:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 1998 02:18:29 GMT, nospam@usit.net (Ed H.) wrote:
> 
>>bodo@interlog.com (Byron Bodo) wrote:
>>>NTFS was an outgrowth of HPFS.  In contrast to HPFS, it's supposed
>>>to be a "journaling" file system whatever that means.  Also
>>
>>It means in the event of a system crash during a change to a file,
>>NTFS can roll the file back to its last "complete" state.  You may
>>lose what was happening during the crash, but it doesn't leave the
>>file in a half changed (often useless) state.
> 
> From what I've read, NTFS does not journal changes to files, only
> changes to file system metadata. This ensures that the file system is
> consistent after a crash but it doesn't prevent the corruption of the
> contents of a file.

Correct.  

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego CA
        Internet: jeh@cmkrnl.com (JH645)  CompuServe: 74140,2055  
drivers, internals, networks, applications, and training for VMS and Windows NT
NT driver FAQ, links, and other information:  http://www.cmkrnl.com/

If you post a reply in news, please don't e-mail it too.  

Can anyone recommend a reliable defragmentation tool for NT server.
Preferably a program I can automate to run once a month and will not
affect an operating Exchange server database.

Also, can someone point me to a web site(s) that are dedicated to
providing reviews (ratings) of software and hardware.  Perhaps a site
that also allows user input.   They exist for movies, automobiles and
nude women so why not computer equipment?

Thank you,
Shawn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shawn D. Connelly, (the ubiquitous) Network Engineer (CNE, MCSE)
Dipix Technologies Inc. 1051 Baxter Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K2C 3P1
tel. 613-596-4942 x115  email: sconnell@dipix.delete.this.com, 
postmaster@dipix.delete.this.com

WARNING: Any unsolicited commercial email sent to '*@dipix.com' may cost the 
sender a $25.00 administration fee.  In addition you grant to us unlimited
free license to use any text and/or other copyrighted materials contained in 
such e-mail for any and all commercial purposes that we see fit. By sending 
me unsolicited commercial e-mail you signal understanding and acceptance of 
these terms.

Notes: Remove the anti-spam ".delete.this." (may change!) from the
       suffix of my email address.  For assurance that I will read
       your reply, please copy your public posting to my email account.

Diskeeper (Executive Software) comes in a server version which may be what
you are after.  Not sure how Speeddisk (Symantec) works on NT Server.  Both
are schedulable.

--
Larry Mattingly, lam323@crane-smtp.army.mil

--------------------------------------------------------------------
sconnell@deletethis.dipix.com wrote in message
<35d35c2e.212563850@news.magmacom.com>...
>Can anyone recommend a reliable defragmentation tool for NT server.
>Preferably a program I can automate to run once a month and will not
>affect an operating Exchange server database.
>
>Also, can someone point me to a web site(s) that are dedicated to
>providing reviews (ratings) of software and hardware.  Perhaps a site
>that also allows user input.   They exist for movies, automobiles and
>nude women so why not computer equipment?
>
>Thank you,
>Shawn
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Shawn D. Connelly, (the ubiquitous) Network Engineer (CNE, MCSE)
>Dipix Technologies Inc. 1051 Baxter Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K2C 3P1
>tel. 613-596-4942 x115  email: sconnell@dipix.delete.this.com,
>postmaster@dipix.delete.this.com
>
>WARNING: Any unsolicited commercial email sent to '*@dipix.com' may cost
the
>sender a $25.00 administration fee.  In addition you grant to us unlimited
>free license to use any text and/or other copyrighted materials contained
in
>such e-mail for any and all commercial purposes that we see fit. By sending
>me unsolicited commercial e-mail you signal understanding and acceptance of
>these terms.
>
>Notes: Remove the anti-spam ".delete.this." (may change!) from the
>       suffix of my email address.  For assurance that I will read
>       your reply, please copy your public posting to my email account.
>

Diskeeper from:
http://www.execsoft.com/

Adrien de Beaupr�, MCSE
LAN Manager, AMS Ottawa.
Adriendb@*nospam*.com


>Can anyone recommend a reliable defragmentation tool for NT server.
>Preferably a program I can automate to run once a month and will not
>affect an operating Exchange server database.
>
>Also, can someone point me to a web site(s) that are dedicated to
>providing reviews (ratings) of software and hardware.  Perhaps a site
>that also allows user input.   They exist for movies, automobiles and
>nude women so why not computer equipment?
>
>Thank you,
>Shawn
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Shawn D. Connelly, (the ubiquitous) Network Engineer (CNE, MCSE)
>Dipix Technologies Inc. 1051 Baxter Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K2C 3P1
>tel. 613-596-4942 x115  email: sconnell@dipix.delete.this.com, 
>postmaster@dipix.delete.this.com
>
>WARNING: Any unsolicited commercial email sent to '*@dipix.com' may cost the 
>sender a $25.00 administration fee.  In addition you grant to us unlimited
>free license to use any text and/or other copyrighted materials contained in 
>such e-mail for any and all commercial purposes that we see fit. By sending 
>me unsolicited commercial e-mail you signal understanding and acceptance of 
>these terms.
>
>Notes: Remove the anti-spam ".delete.this." (may change!) from the
>       suffix of my email address.  For assurance that I will read
>       your reply, please copy your public posting to my email account.
>

Diskeeper from Executive Software is the only one that you can aford to run on a
server. Download an eval from the link in my catalog at
http://www.jsiinc.com/catalog.htm#CATMID


On Wed, 12 Aug 1998 22:19:45 -0700, sconnell@deletethis.dipix.com wrote:

>Can anyone recommend a reliable defragmentation tool for NT server.
>Preferably a program I can automate to run once a month and will not
>affect an operating Exchange server database.
>
>Also, can someone point me to a web site(s) that are dedicated to
>providing reviews (ratings) of software and hardware.  Perhaps a site
>that also allows user input.   They exist for movies, automobiles and
>nude women so why not computer equipment?
>
>Thank you,
>Shawn
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Shawn D. Connelly, (the ubiquitous) Network Engineer (CNE, MCSE)
>Dipix Technologies Inc. 1051 Baxter Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K2C 3P1
>tel. 613-596-4942 x115  email: sconnell@dipix.delete.this.com, 
>postmaster@dipix.delete.this.com
>
>WARNING: Any unsolicited commercial email sent to '*@dipix.com' may cost the 
>sender a $25.00 administration fee.  In addition you grant to us unlimited
>free license to use any text and/or other copyrighted materials contained in 
>such e-mail for any and all commercial purposes that we see fit. By sending 
>me unsolicited commercial e-mail you signal understanding and acceptance of 
>these terms.
>
>Notes: Remove the anti-spam ".delete.this." (may change!) from the
>       suffix of my email address.  For assurance that I will read
>       your reply, please copy your public posting to my email account.

Jerold Schulman - Microsoft BackOffice <MVP>

JSI, Inc.
1045 Essex Court, Alpharetta, GA  30004-3811
Orders:+1-800-585-9588   Phone:+1-770-475-3820   Fax:+1-770-442-3820
Web Site:  http://www.jsiinc.com   Internet Mail:  jsi@cis.compuserve.com

Thank you for the recommendations folks!

It appears that Diskeeper from Executive Software is the way to go!

Now, can someone tell me why...when I called MS support on Friday, I
was tolded that MS didn't support any third party tools like
DiskKeeper.  They added that NT's NTFS isn't prone to fragmentation.

Urrgh!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shawn D. Connelly, (the ubiquitous) Network Engineer (CNE, MCSE)
Dipix Technologies Inc. 1051 Baxter Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K2C 3P1
tel. 613-596-4942 x115  email: sconnell@dipix.delete.this.com, 
postmaster@dipix.delete.this.com

WARNING: Any unsolicited commercial email sent to '*@dipix.com' may cost the 
sender a $25.00 administration fee.  In addition you grant to us unlimited
free license to use any text and/or other copyrighted materials contained in 
such e-mail for any and all commercial purposes that we see fit. By sending 
me unsolicited commercial e-mail you signal understanding and acceptance of 
these terms.

Notes: Remove the anti-spam ".delete.this." (may change!) from the
       suffix of my email address.  For assurance that I will read
       your reply, please copy your public posting to my email account.

sconnell@deletethis.dipix.com wrote in message
<35d7617f.397010657@news.magmacom.com>...
>Thank you for the recommendations folks!

>It appears that Diskeeper from Executive Software is the way to go!


I don't know about that, I've found it to be less effective than say Vopt or
O&O defrag.

>Now, can someone tell me why...when I called MS support on Friday, I
>was tolded that MS didn't support any third party tools like
>DiskKeeper.

Why would you even call them for support on that regard?    But the
reason you were told that is because, well, Microsoft doesn't want
to be responsible for it, that's why.   Don't know what is going through
there heads to lead to that decision, but it's the one they made.


>They added that NT's NTFS isn't prone to fragmentation.
>Urrgh!


In a way, it isn't, but it isn't completely safe.

>Can anyone recommend a reliable defragmentation tool for NT server.
>Preferably a program I can automate to run once a month and will not
>affect an operating Exchange server database.

If you are in europe, It might be faster to visit my website.
http://www.subscri.be
Amongst other interesting programs, you can download Diskeeper Lite
and order Diskeeper 3.0

BTW, my Diskeeper runs every night and keeps my disks clean and
fast...


peter

HA!  Diskeeper is a joke, try O&O defrag.  Diskeeper did nothing noticable
with respect to performance on my machine.
Larry Mattingly wrote in message ...
>Diskeeper (Executive Software) comes in a server version which may be what
>you are after.  Not sure how Speeddisk (Symantec) works on NT Server.  Both
>are schedulable.
>
>--
>Larry Mattingly, lam323@crane-smtp.army.mil
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>sconnell@deletethis.dipix.com wrote in message
><35d35c2e.212563850@news.magmacom.com>...
>>Can anyone recommend a reliable defragmentation tool for NT server.
>>Preferably a program I can automate to run once a month and will not
>>affect an operating Exchange server database.
>>
>>Also, can someone point me to a web site(s) that are dedicated to
>>providing reviews (ratings) of software and hardware.  Perhaps a site
>>that also allows user input.   They exist for movies, automobiles and
>>nude women so why not computer equipment?
>>
>>Thank you,
>>Shawn
>>
>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>Shawn D. Connelly, (the ubiquitous) Network Engineer (CNE, MCSE)
>>Dipix Technologies Inc. 1051 Baxter Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K2C 3P1
>>tel. 613-596-4942 x115  email: sconnell@dipix.delete.this.com,
>>postmaster@dipix.delete.this.com
>>
>>WARNING: Any unsolicited commercial email sent to '*@dipix.com' may cost
>the
>>sender a $25.00 administration fee.  In addition you grant to us unlimited
>>free license to use any text and/or other copyrighted materials contained
>in
>>such e-mail for any and all commercial purposes that we see fit. By
sending
>>me unsolicited commercial e-mail you signal understanding and acceptance
of
>>these terms.
>>
>>Notes: Remove the anti-spam ".delete.this." (may change!) from the
>>       suffix of my email address.  For assurance that I will read
>>       your reply, please copy your public posting to my email account.
>>
>
>

That NT isn't "prone" to fragmentation is the old MS line - but even MS now
admits it happens.  In addition, NT 5.0 will include a version of DiskKeeper
built in.  That shows me two points:

1.  Even NT becomes fragmented (and it does), and MS recognizes this; and,
2.  NT may not officially support DiskKeeper, but it thinks highly enough of
it to include it in NT 5.0.

--

Frank GoBell


sconnell@deletethis.dipix.com wrote in message
<35d7617f.397010657@news.magmacom.com>...
>Thank you for the recommendations folks!
>
>It appears that Diskeeper from Executive Software is the way to go!
>
>Now, can someone tell me why...when I called MS support on Friday, I
>was tolded that MS didn't support any third party tools like
>DiskKeeper.  They added that NT's NTFS isn't prone to fragmentation.
>
>Urrgh!
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Shawn D. Connelly, (the ubiquitous) Network Engineer (CNE, MCSE)
>Dipix Technologies Inc. 1051 Baxter Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K2C 3P1
>tel. 613-596-4942 x115  email: sconnell@dipix.delete.this.com,
>postmaster@dipix.delete.this.com
>
>WARNING: Any unsolicited commercial email sent to '*@dipix.com' may cost
the
>sender a $25.00 administration fee.  In addition you grant to us unlimited
>free license to use any text and/or other copyrighted materials contained
in
>such e-mail for any and all commercial purposes that we see fit. By sending
>me unsolicited commercial e-mail you signal understanding and acceptance of
>these terms.
>
>Notes: Remove the anti-spam ".delete.this." (may change!) from the
>       suffix of my email address.  For assurance that I will read
>       your reply, please copy your public posting to my email account.

>>Thank you for the recommendations folks!
>>It appears that Diskeeper from Executive Software is the way to go!

>I don't know about that, I've found it to be less effective than say Vopt
or
>O&O defrag.

>>Now, can someone tell me why...when I called MS support on Friday, I
>>was tolded that MS didn't support any third party tools like
>>DiskKeeper.

>Why would you even call them for support on that regard?    But the
>reason you were told that is because, well, Microsoft doesn't want
>to be responsible for it, that's why.   Don't know what is going through
>there heads to lead to that decision, but it's the one they made.


I was also having a problem with Diskeeper, some might remember my posts. It
seemed my C:(2.1) would not defragment and Diskeeper would keep saying that
it was 34% fragmented and must be defragmented. All I did was to let
Diskeeper defrag my C and D drive every night. It took around 3 weeks, but
my C is finally around 5% now. I'm wondering if Norton Utilities 2.0 for NT
is worth the money.........SeeYa...




The Start Page.....Best Sites On The Web
http://www.max-net.com/personal/sampson/index.htm
ICQ 3194762
sampson@max-net.com

Harlequin wrote:
> ... I'm wondering if Norton Utilities 2.0 for NT
> is worth the money.........SeeYa...

I run it on my NTFS partitions and haven't had problems.  Kinda pricely
though.

id rather use disk keeper

--
hope this helps...
barazani
<barazani@hotmail.com>
Matthew Kruk wrote in message <35D932F2.73C73401@netcom.ca>...
>Harlequin wrote:
>> ... I'm wondering if Norton Utilities 2.0 for NT
>> is worth the money.........SeeYa...
>
>I run it on my NTFS partitions and haven't had problems.  Kinda pricely
>though.

I had Disk Keeper kill a partition once, and have never had a problem with
any thing from Norton.

--
Christopher Maddux
cmaddux@digirep.com
www.digirep.com
MCP+I, MCSE
Microsoft Beta Tester
IPP

barazani <barazani@hotmail.com> wrote in message
35d97cf4.0@news.barak.net.il...
|id rather use disk keeper
|
|--
|hope this helps...
|barazani
|<barazani@hotmail.com>
|Matthew Kruk wrote in message <35D932F2.73C73401@netcom.ca>...
|>Harlequin wrote:
|>> ... I'm wondering if Norton Utilities 2.0 for NT
|>> is worth the money.........SeeYa...
|>
|>I run it on my NTFS partitions and haven't had problems.  Kinda pricely
|>though.
|
|

Christopher Maddux wrote:
> 
> I had Disk Keeper kill a partition once, and have never had a problem with
> any thing from Norton.
> 
> --
> Christopher Maddux
> cmaddux@digirep.com
> www.digirep.com
> MCP+I, MCSE
> Microsoft Beta Tester
> IPP
> 
> barazani <barazani@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> 35d97cf4.0@news.barak.net.il...
> |id rather use disk keeper
> |
> |--
> |hope this helps...
> |barazani
> |<barazani@hotmail.com>
> |Matthew Kruk wrote in message <35D932F2.73C73401@netcom.ca>...
> |>Harlequin wrote:
> |>> ... I'm wondering if Norton Utilities 2.0 for NT
> |>> is worth the money.........SeeYa...
> |>
> |>I run it on my NTFS partitions and haven't had problems.  Kinda pricely
> |>though.
> |
> |

I've tried Perfect Disk from RAXCO (www.raxco.com). Seems OK - even
placed old files at the outside of the disk (slower, apparently).

Can also get 30 day sampler

Hi,

Steve Bower a �crit dans le message
<35D9CAC9.5BC1@removethis.dial.pipex.com>...
>I've tried Perfect Disk from RAXCO (www.raxco.com). Seems OK - even
>placed old files at the outside of the disk (slower, apparently).

Tried it yesterday, crashed at the end of the process.

Eric

Christopher Maddux wrote in message
<#shVHWsy9GA.207@uppssnewspub05.moswest.msn.net>...
>I had Disk Keeper kill a partition once, and have never had a problem with
>any thing from Norton.


I use Speed Disk & it works well.
>
>
Richard Dakin

Address is spamblocked
Please keep all replies within the group so they benefit everybody

Try VoptNT
http://www.goldenbow.com/ntvopt.htm



Eric Lapouge wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Steve Bower a �crit dans le message
> <35D9CAC9.5BC1@removethis.dial.pipex.com>...
> >I've tried Perfect Disk from RAXCO (www.raxco.com). Seems OK - even
> >placed old files at the outside of the disk (slower, apparently).
> 
> Tried it yesterday, crashed at the end of the process.
> 
> Eric

Phalla wrote:
> 
> Try VoptNT
> http://www.goldenbow.com/ntvopt.htm
> 
> Eric Lapouge wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Steve Bower a �crit dans le message
> > <35D9CAC9.5BC1@removethis.dial.pipex.com>...
> > >I've tried Perfect Disk from RAXCO (www.raxco.com). Seems OK - even
> > >placed old files at the outside of the disk (slower, apparently).
> >
> > Tried it yesterday, crashed at the end of the process.
> >
> > Eric

Apparently there is a patch which may help - you will need to get from
Tech Support.  Mine crashed at first, but now is pretty robust.

Heyla,
Diskeeper is awesome software. WWW.execusoft.com
they even have a 'lite' version that's free.
Loche

On Sat, 29 Aug 1998 14:58:46 GMT, Matthew Kruk <mkruk@netcom.ca>
wrote:

>Harlequin wrote:
>> ... I'm wondering if Norton Utilities 2.0 for NT
>> is worth the money.........SeeYa...
>
>I run it on my NTFS partitions and haven't had problems.  Kinda pricely
>though.

I don't like the Norton product, although I don't have a better
recommendation.   I found that repeatedly running defrag doesn't improve
things.  In fact, sometimes it makes the situation worse.  Try it!  --Bill


Matthew Kruk wrote in message <35D932F2.73C73401@netcom.ca>...
>Harlequin wrote:
>> ... I'm wondering if Norton Utilities 2.0 for NT
>> is worth the money.........SeeYa...
>
>I run it on my NTFS partitions and haven't had problems.  Kinda pricely
>though.

On Tue, 1 Sep 1998 20:31:43 -0400, "William W. Plummer"
<wplummer@V-sign.com> wrote:

>I don't like the Norton product, although I don't have a better
>recommendation.   I found that repeatedly running defrag doesn't improve
>things.  In fact, sometimes it makes the situation worse.  Try it!  --Bill

Disk-Keeper lite... shareware, seems to do the job adequately without
the price. :-)

How could defragging make the situation worse?

"William W. Plummer" <wplummer@V-sign.com> wrote:

>I don't like the Norton product, although I don't have a better
>recommendation.   I found that repeatedly running defrag doesn't improve
>things.  In fact, sometimes it makes the situation worse.  Try it!  --Bill
>
>
>Matthew Kruk wrote in message <35D932F2.73C73401@netcom.ca>...
>>Harlequin wrote:
>>> ... I'm wondering if Norton Utilities 2.0 for NT
>>> is worth the money.........SeeYa...
>>
>>I run it on my NTFS partitions and haven't had problems.  Kinda pricely
>>though.
>

-- 
_______________________
Ed Hansberry
xxxxxhans@usit.net - If you want to send me email,
you know what to do with the xxxxx.

Ed H. wrote:
> 
> How could defragging make the situation worse?
> 
> "William W. Plummer" <wplummer@V-sign.com> wrote:
> 
> >I don't like the Norton product, although I don't have a better
> >recommendation.   I found that repeatedly running defrag doesn't improve
> >things.  In fact, sometimes it makes the situation worse.  Try it!  --Bill

If you run defrag while other things are going on, the increased I/O
does indeed cause more fragmantation than when you started.

--
__________________________________
Remove "delme" from email address to reply.

I have had excellent luck with the Diskeeper package from Executive Software.  They have a trial version that you can install.  It
doesn't even require a reboot!

It will defrag directories (at boot time only) and is, in my opinion, far superior to the Symantec product.

L8R!

        db


>"William W. Plummer" <wplummer@V-sign.com> wrote:
>
>>I don't like the Norton product, although I don't have a better
>>recommendation.   I found that repeatedly running defrag doesn't improve
>>things.  In fact, sometimes it makes the situation worse.  Try it!  --Bill
>>

Chris Phillipo <delmecphillip@cbnet.ns.ca> wrote:

>Ed H. wrote:
>> 
>> How could defragging make the situation worse?
>> 
>> "William W. Plummer" <wplummer@V-sign.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >I don't like the Norton product, although I don't have a better
>> >recommendation.   I found that repeatedly running defrag doesn't improve
>> >things.  In fact, sometimes it makes the situation worse.  Try it!  --Bill
>
>If you run defrag while other things are going on, the increased I/O
>does indeed cause more fragmantation than when you started.

Silly me.  I was assuming you had Diskeeper set to a low background
priority so it wouldn't take away from system performance and
potentially increase defragmentation.

I guess if you misuse any tool, it won't work as advertised.
-- 
_______________________
Ed Hansberry
xxxxxhans@usit.net - If you want to send me email,
you know what to do with the xxxxx.

Ed H. <nospam@usit.net> wrote in article
<35f2c738.19269758@msnews.microsoft.com>...
> 
> Silly me.  I was assuming you had Diskeeper set to a low background
> priority so it wouldn't take away from system performance and
> potentially increase defragmentation.
> 
> I guess if you misuse any tool, it won't work as advertised.
> -- 

You have apparently not used Diskeeper on large fragmented files or on
large, badly fragmented drives.  You can set the diskeeper priority as low
as you want, but once it starts working on a large (100+ MB) file, it
doesn't matter how low its priority is, it will still slow your system down
significantly (assuming a single processor system) while it works on each
individual file.  If you don't believe me, try the following.  Create ten
100+ MB files in the NTFS drive of your choice.  Next, compress those five
files.  Next, decompress those files.  Next, compress them again.  Your
drive should now be badly fragmented (at least those ten files).  Now start
diskeeper running in the background at its lowest priority (set to
defragment that drive, of course).  After a couple of minutes, start some
cpu and disk intensive operation (such as 3D rendering) and see what
happens to your performance.  If diskeeper, never actually starts
defragmenting any large files, performance may not be greatly affected. 
However, once it starts defragmenting a large file, system performance will
slow to a crawl.

-Steve

> >> >I don't like the Norton product, although I don't have a better
> >> >recommendation.   I found that repeatedly running defrag doesn't improve
> >> >things.  In fact, sometimes it makes the situation worse.  Try it!  --Bill
> >
> >If you run defrag while other things are going on, the increased I/O
> >does indeed cause more fragmantation than when you started.
> 
> Silly me.  I was assuming you had Diskeeper set to a low background
> priority so it wouldn't take away from system performance and
> potentially increase defragmentation.
> 
> I guess if you misuse any tool, it won't work as advertised.

I don't have the retail Disk keeper, you can't set it to anything but on
or off. Quite frankly I think it's ridiculous that we have to go out and
buy a defragger for Microsoft files systems that are so prone to
fragmentation.  I wonder what they are doing with that 20 cents a copy
they save by not including one with NT.


--
__________________________________
Remove "delme" from email address to reply.

Maybe for once in their history they are not screwing the little guy by
developing their own defrager. What do you think would happen to Diskeeper
if they did?

Chris Phillipo wrote in message <35F2D572.19D48DCC@cbnet.ns.ca>...
>I think it's ridiculous that we have to go out and
>buy a defragger for Microsoft files systems that are so prone to
>fragmentation.  I wonder what they are doing with that 20 cents a copy
>they save by not including one with NT.

John Lucas wrote:
> 
> Maybe for once in their history they are not screwing the little guy by
> developing their own defrager. What do you think would happen to Diskeeper
> if they did?

You mean what would happen to the free defragger?  I wouldn't need to
download it and I would be happy.  If I felt the need for advanced
scheduled defragging I would buy Diskkeeper retail.

--
__________________________________
Remove "delme" from email address to reply.

They (MS) are planning on including Diskeeper Lite w/ NT5, and I think NT5
beta2 which recently came out has it.

>I don't have the retail Disk keeper, you can't set it to anything but on
>or off. Quite frankly I think it's ridiculous that we have to go out and
>buy a defragger for Microsoft files systems that are so prone to
>fragmentation.  I wonder what they are doing with that 20 cents a copy
>they save by not including one with NT.
>

it won't make it worse - try Diskeeper

Ed H. wrote:

> How could defragging make the situation worse?
>
> "William W. Plummer" <wplummer@V-sign.com> wrote:
>
> >I don't like the Norton product, although I don't have a better
> >recommendation.   I found that repeatedly running defrag doesn't improve
> >things.  In fact, sometimes it makes the situation worse.  Try it!  --Bill
> >
> >
> >Matthew Kruk wrote in message <35D932F2.73C73401@netcom.ca>...
> >>Harlequin wrote:
> >>> ... I'm wondering if Norton Utilities 2.0 for NT
> >>> is worth the money.........SeeYa...
> >>
> >>I run it on my NTFS partitions and haven't had problems.  Kinda pricely
> >>though.
> >
>
> --
> _______________________
> Ed Hansberry
> xxxxxhans@usit.net - If you want to send me email,
> you know what to do with the xxxxx.

HI
Another very good defrag utility is PERFECTDISK NT, you could download a
trial version from WWW.RAXCO.COM.


Chris Phillipo wrote in message <35F19851.ED07067@cbnet.ns.ca>...
>Ed H. wrote:
>>
>> How could defragging make the situation worse?
>>
>> "William W. Plummer" <wplummer@V-sign.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I don't like the Norton product, although I don't have a better
>> >recommendation.   I found that repeatedly running defrag doesn't improve
>> >things.  In fact, sometimes it makes the situation worse.  Try
t!  --Bill
>
>If you run defrag while other things are going on, the increased I/O
>does indeed cause more fragmantation than when you started.
>
>--
>__________________________________
>Remove "delme" from email address to reply.

Diskeeper is also very good for all versions of NT.

You can download a copy from:

http://www.diskeeper.com

We used Nortons and quickly changed to DK as the results were much better
and faster than Nortons

Regards,

Matt


Stan wrote in message <6v90rj$70c$1@winter.news.erols.com>...
>HI
>Another very good defrag utility is PERFECTDISK NT, you could download a
>trial version from WWW.RAXCO.COM.
>
>
>Chris Phillipo wrote in message <35F19851.ED07067@cbnet.ns.ca>...
>>Ed H. wrote:
>>>
>>> How could defragging make the situation worse?
>>>
>>> "William W. Plummer" <wplummer@V-sign.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I don't like the Norton product, although I don't have a better
>>> >recommendation.   I found that repeatedly running defrag doesn't
improve
>>> >things.  In fact, sometimes it makes the situation worse.  Try
>t!  --Bill
>>
>>If you run defrag while other things are going on, the increased I/O
>>does indeed cause more fragmantation than when you started.
>>
>>--
>>__________________________________
>>Remove "delme" from email address to reply.
>
>

Matt wrote:
> We used Nortons and quickly changed to DK as the results were much better
> and faster than Nortons

I have Norton and Diskeeper 2.0 on my server. When I first installed
Norton (before I got DK) I noticed that it did defragment the files
fairly well, but it fragmented the freespace *very* badly. The largest
free space was usually less than 1 MB (on an 24GB RAID 5 array with
around 6-8GB of free space), and so almost every new file was badly
fragmented, so Norton had to work even harder (and longer) to defrag the
next time (I have it run every night). I was quite disappointed, so
bought Diskeeper, which I like a lot better. It defrags the files
nicely, and consolidates the freespace somewhat; it's still fragmented,
but not *nearly* as badly as Norton left it. Overall, DK runs a lot
faster, probably because new files aren't as fragmented. I'm replacing
that server soon, so I bought DK 3.0, but haven't played with it much
yet.

I somehow deleted COM2 (modem)
after installing the fresh NT I still didnt get it
back..I add manually that port but dont seem
to be able to configure it properly....can
anyone sugggest a solution plz?


--
Rouben Malayan
---------------------------------------------
@mail. rouben@netvision.net.il
web. http://members.tripod.com/~rouben_m/
v. +972-3-5259857
mob. 052-333227
ICQ 4939234
---------------------------------------------
....keep the knowledge precious in ma mind...