re: Defrags
Wednesday, October 28, 2009 at 11:30 pm
Windows XP Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by Ricer46
(22017 messages posted)
People defrag their disks, thinking it's critical to system performance, when in
reality it seldom provides a noticeable difference. Going through the mathematics
of the time it takes to retrieve a fragmented file versus a non-fragmented file reveals
that the difference is very small. A data file with a hundred fragments takes (on
average) about 0.3 seconds longer to load.
On Wednesday, October 28, 2009 at 4:31 am, Carol wrote:
>Thanks to all who replied , but some of you say you do use a defragger program and
>others don't, may I ask why.
>this is to Martin: you mentioned in your note "Unless you are experiencing problems,"
>what problems are you talking about?
>
>
>
- Written in response to:
- re: Defrags (Carol: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 at 4:31 am)
Responses to this message:
 | re: Defrags (MartinM: Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 2:34 am) |
|
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 | Defrags (Carol: Tue, Oct 27, 2009, 4:13 am) |
 |  | re: Defrags (William Mowbray: Tue, Oct 27, 2009, 4:37 am) |
|  | re: Defrags (Keith Stanier: Tue, Oct 27, 2009, 5:18 am) |
|  | | re: Defrags (William Mowbray: Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 4:44 am) |
| | | re: Defrags (Ricer46: Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 11:30 pm) |
| |
| |
Return to the Windows XP Discussion Forum
|
|
