Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Rhinorhino on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Boss does not recomend defrag
- Thread starter djcrucial
- Start date
Heh, I love hearing this kind of stuff. Find out what he's smoking and then ask if we can have some too!
<sarcasm>I find that they often put tools in systems that will ruin them.
</sarcasm>AFAIK, he is on crack and if he is your boss, then someone needs to reevaluate his intelligence or send him off to basic computing 101.
Defragging is a good thing and will generally keep things running at top speed. I would think that once a week on the server would be fine, unless you scheduled it for late at night when there isn't much going on (as you wouldn't want it to use CPU cycles that applications might need).
Just my two cents on the matter.
Cheers!
Your boss reminds me of my ex son-in-law. He knows what he knows (albeit WRONG) and you can't convince him otherwise.
There is some evidence that you can defrag too much, but the jury is out on that.
I would let the server deteriorate and do it his way. He is the boss and a know it all. I wouldn't worry about it. I got tired of arguing with my son-in-law on everything. You'll get tired of arguing with your boss. There is NO basis for the concerns he has voiced.
Jim
There is some evidence that you can defrag too much, but the jury is out on that.
I would let the server deteriorate and do it his way. He is the boss and a know it all. I wouldn't worry about it. I got tired of arguing with my son-in-law on everything. You'll get tired of arguing with your boss. There is NO basis for the concerns he has voiced.
Jim
I feel for you.
I work with some of these Magazine experts. The read some info in a PC mag. get it all wrong and then know it all. Just let him be, You will never change his mind and he will never admit that he is wrong. Just remember your boss is an A-hole.
I work with some of these Magazine experts. The read some info in a PC mag. get it all wrong and then know it all. Just let him be, You will never change his mind and he will never admit that he is wrong. Just remember your boss is an A-hole.
Sometimes those clusters just need a good clobbering to whip them into shape!
Seriously though, djcrucial, it's a question of "Pay now or pay later." Defragging always introduces more stress on the drive during it's reorganization. One of the resulting benefits though, is to save wear and tear over time on the drive's head actuator - it shouldn't have to do nearly as many back-to-back cylinder-to-cylinder seeks on a defragmented drive.
Does this *really* make any difference over the life of the drive? Hard to tell, but it certainly isn't detrimental and at least outweighs the wear and tear of defragging to begin with.
This might be a more debateable point if this was the *only* reason one defragmented a drive, but - of course - it isn't. Performance is the primary reason and should far outweigh the concern over wear and tear (or cluster-clobbering - heh!).
If there is absolutely no concern for performance and there is some inordinate fear about wearing out the magnetic media on the platters, then I suppose your boss has a point.
Seriously though, djcrucial, it's a question of "Pay now or pay later." Defragging always introduces more stress on the drive during it's reorganization. One of the resulting benefits though, is to save wear and tear over time on the drive's head actuator - it shouldn't have to do nearly as many back-to-back cylinder-to-cylinder seeks on a defragmented drive.
Does this *really* make any difference over the life of the drive? Hard to tell, but it certainly isn't detrimental and at least outweighs the wear and tear of defragging to begin with.
This might be a more debateable point if this was the *only* reason one defragmented a drive, but - of course - it isn't. Performance is the primary reason and should far outweigh the concern over wear and tear (or cluster-clobbering - heh!).
If there is absolutely no concern for performance and there is some inordinate fear about wearing out the magnetic media on the platters, then I suppose your boss has a point.
Ok, let's break this bosses "opinion". Here are some of the specs on a hard drive taht I will use in my example. (The specs are for the new WD 36.7 GB 10k SATA HD.)
Bytes Per Sector 512
Average Read Seek 5.2 ms (average)
Track-to-track Seek 0.7 ms (average)
Full Stroke Read Seek 10.2 ms (average)
So your boss says defragmenting will "clobber the clusters". I bet he also thinks that having alot of small clusters increases the utilization of the disk because small programs can "fill in the cracks". This just isn't so. If you've ever watch the Analysis part of the Defrag program it shows you a rough picture of how te drive is fragmented where the color red means fragmentation and the other colors have various meanings. There are various hardware/software ways the computer breaks up files into fragments, but just looking at the hardware part here it is:
So the Average Read Seek for the stats above is 5.2 ms. This means that on average when you have to do a read and you are not on the track then it usually takes around 5.2 ms to find the track and read from it. This is opposed to Track-to-track Seek which means that you are consecutively reading from the tracks next to the each other. If you noticed the Track-to-track Seek is MUCH lower than the Average Read Seek. A fragmented file means that the data of that file is not in tracks consecutively, but rather in tracks on different parts of the physical disk. Which means that if a file is fragmented then for each fragmentation it has to perform a Average Read Seek motion. For large files this could be MANY of these motions causing a delay in execution. Conversely, when you defragment you are sorting the contents of hte hard disk so that, if possible, there are as few fragments as possible. Say that you have teh "perfect" defrag experiece and every file is located in consecutive tracks, then that means that the hard disk would be performing a Track-to-track Seek motion which again is much faster!! So by defragmenting you are lining up the files so they can be read and accessed much faster than if they were fragmented throughout the disk. A side effect benefit of defragmenting is that you also end up with large blocks of unused space, which can help in writing data to the hard disk.
Anyways, I just thought you should know the REAL benefits and not what some "know-it-all" thinks.
Let me know if this helps.
Burke
Bytes Per Sector 512
Average Read Seek 5.2 ms (average)
Track-to-track Seek 0.7 ms (average)
Full Stroke Read Seek 10.2 ms (average)
So your boss says defragmenting will "clobber the clusters". I bet he also thinks that having alot of small clusters increases the utilization of the disk because small programs can "fill in the cracks". This just isn't so. If you've ever watch the Analysis part of the Defrag program it shows you a rough picture of how te drive is fragmented where the color red means fragmentation and the other colors have various meanings. There are various hardware/software ways the computer breaks up files into fragments, but just looking at the hardware part here it is:
So the Average Read Seek for the stats above is 5.2 ms. This means that on average when you have to do a read and you are not on the track then it usually takes around 5.2 ms to find the track and read from it. This is opposed to Track-to-track Seek which means that you are consecutively reading from the tracks next to the each other. If you noticed the Track-to-track Seek is MUCH lower than the Average Read Seek. A fragmented file means that the data of that file is not in tracks consecutively, but rather in tracks on different parts of the physical disk. Which means that if a file is fragmented then for each fragmentation it has to perform a Average Read Seek motion. For large files this could be MANY of these motions causing a delay in execution. Conversely, when you defragment you are sorting the contents of hte hard disk so that, if possible, there are as few fragments as possible. Say that you have teh "perfect" defrag experiece and every file is located in consecutive tracks, then that means that the hard disk would be performing a Track-to-track Seek motion which again is much faster!! So by defragmenting you are lining up the files so they can be read and accessed much faster than if they were fragmented throughout the disk. A side effect benefit of defragmenting is that you also end up with large blocks of unused space, which can help in writing data to the hard disk.
Anyways, I just thought you should know the REAL benefits and not what some "know-it-all" thinks.
Let me know if this helps.
Burke
clobber the clusters... lol
have him start up performance monitor and show him before/after monitors of physical disk, % disk time over a typical day.
first with his method not defragging for 6 months, then freshly defragged.
once per week is good for most servers, 1 or 2 times per month on clients.
Nick
Computer Support, no not just hardware.. I support everything
have him start up performance monitor and show him before/after monitors of physical disk, % disk time over a typical day.
first with his method not defragging for 6 months, then freshly defragged.
once per week is good for most servers, 1 or 2 times per month on clients.
Nick
Computer Support, no not just hardware.. I support everything
There's not much point in owning a HDD just to prolong its life. It's there to do a job and not defragging will render it less efficient. Your boss does believe in backing up data doesn't he? That also makes a HDD work hard and much more greatly so if it is heavily fragmented. I hope he doesn't argue against doing backups because it shortens the life of HDDs.
Tell him to get gender reaasignment. That should make him more reasonable and amenable to logic. It did for me!!!!
I ASSUME YOUR BOSS IS A MAN.
![[lipstick2]](/data/assets/smilies/lipstick2.gif "[lipstick2] [lipstick2]")
Tell him to get gender reaasignment. That should make him more reasonable and amenable to logic. It did for me!!!!
I ASSUME YOUR BOSS IS A MAN.
I should add that there is a good case for little and often because the amount of work done during a defrag, and hence wear and tear on a HDD, increases exponentially with the time elapsed since the last defrag.
Strategy is important. For example, ordering files in date order on a data volume (not a system/software volume) will group most frequently used files together. O&O Defrag can do this.
My remarks are most relevant for IDE drives. SCSI drives permit elevator seeks which render defragging much less necessary but still desirable. IDE drives cannot do this (someone please contradict me if this assertion is in error).
I also like to keep the paging file on its very own drive with its very own set of r/w heads.
I hate r/w head movements and my mission in life is to minimise them.
NTFS puts small files in the MFT doesn't it? This mitigates the evil effects of larger clusters.
Strategy is important. For example, ordering files in date order on a data volume (not a system/software volume) will group most frequently used files together. O&O Defrag can do this.
My remarks are most relevant for IDE drives. SCSI drives permit elevator seeks which render defragging much less necessary but still desirable. IDE drives cannot do this (someone please contradict me if this assertion is in error).
I also like to keep the paging file on its very own drive with its very own set of r/w heads.
I hate r/w head movements and my mission in life is to minimise them.
NTFS puts small files in the MFT doesn't it? This mitigates the evil effects of larger clusters.
Does your boss also GUN his car engine immediately before shutting off to "throw the oil to the top of the engine, so it will be there on a cold start and reduce wear"? 8)
Newposter
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment."
Newposter
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment."
- Thread starter
- #12
Thanks Guys for you comments. I thought I was the problem here guess not, but my boss just has a one track mind and I guess he will just have to learn on his own cause I am not going to correct him. I hate ignorant close minded people.
You guys made my day!!
Thank You
You guys made my day!!
Thank You
To add to this.....
I like to think of defragging as "reorganizing the file cabinet". It will make it easier & faster to find something. That's what defragging does. Your time frames seem a little excessive. I would follow edemiere'stimetable. Defrag the servers once every week or two, and set it to do it during the night/weekend when the servier is not in use. The workstations could be once a month.
Good luck!
I like to think of defragging as "reorganizing the file cabinet". It will make it easier & faster to find something. That's what defragging does. Your time frames seem a little excessive. I would follow edemiere'stimetable. Defrag the servers once every week or two, and set it to do it during the night/weekend when the servier is not in use. The workstations could be once a month.
Good luck!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question