I am actually rather amazed that MS do not provide a suitable tool within the OS, when you consider how quickly the registry can become cluttered.Ī: I totally agree with you that software vendors, like other companies, should state clearly and upfront what you are buying when you purchase a software license. They are Registry Clean Expert (), Registry Clean Pro (I also found a free registry cleaner, which I downloaded and used (and appears to work) Eusig Free Registry Cleaner 1.1 (This does not have the ability to modify windows startup behaviour, but it seems you can do that simply enough by running msconfig (on XP at least). I did, however, do a bit more searching on the net and found two sites which appear to offer unlimited usage of the programs (two of them mention an additional amount for lifetime upgrades, but I assume if you don’t want the upgrades the initial product will continue to work indefinitely). When you consider that I can buy an unlimited XP-home licence for about $150, $30 or so for one small program for one years use only seems rather exorbitant. It seems there is a nice little ‘cartel’ going with these things. Hopefully, ext4's delayed allocation and extents support reduces fragmentation in the wild.1) Offer to download a scan program for freeĢ) The scan program reports various errors and says you have to pay for a licence to fix the problemsģ) Somewhere buried in the small print is a note that the license is for a limited period (I guess a year!) - which you probably wont spot unless you are looking for it. As the package name suggests, it is not ext4 aware (yet). It requires root permissions, but gives you a view of how many non-contiguous regions a file has. On Ubuntu you can check how fragmented a file is with the utility filefrag, in package e2fsprogs. So it's not like you need to edit video to trigger bad conditions, just a large history database that properly calls fsync() on OSX. Some of this may be masked by OSX's decision to implement POSIX fsync() as a no-op (allowed by the standard, but not very nice). These sqlite databases contain the browser history, and are used in places to suggest text strings to you, like URL completion or form autofill. At one point my profile had a sqlite database with over three thousand fragments. Files like sqlite databases, as used by firefox, will quickly fragment as they deliver small writes regularly as you use the browser. People will give you lies like "UNIX filesystems never fragment." They are liars, and you should listen to me instead. IDefrag, Drive Genius and a handful of other utilities will all defragment your hard drive as well. If done as part of a backup routine the time hit may not be terrible but it's free to do it this way. This is done using Carbon Copy Cloner or SuperDuper and requires an extra hard drive. The most popular options for defragmenting a hard drive for OS X I've used and run across are:Ĭloning the hard drive to another drive and back. For your standard user - a near non-issue. The OS itself also defrags "small" (20MB or smaller) files on the fly since 10.3 (Panther).įragmenting still happens and you can see performance drop because of it, especially in video editing systems or a workflow that requires the ability to read or write large files quickly to the disk. Speaking for Mac OS X specifically HFS+ does a decent enough job of trying to keep things from being fragmented compared to older systems but it still happens just not on the same scale. All filesystems will fragment but newer ones are more resistant to fragmenting so badly. Useful in certain circumstances but it's less of an issue than it was with FAT or regular HFS.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |