Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Defragmenting problem.


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
15 replies to this topic

#1 oldsoldier

oldsoldier

  • Members
  • 60 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:County Durham, UK
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 16 August 2005 - 01:43 PM

Computer Information:

Specifications - American Megatrends Inc
System Model unknown
BIOS Version - American Megatrends Inc. P1.30

Operating System - Microsoft Windows XP Professional
Version - 5.1.2600
Service Pack - 2.0
Location - C:\Windows
PID - 55274-645-5919031-23575
Hot Fix - KB893803

Memory [RAM]: Capacity - 1 GB

Processor - AMD Athlon [tm] XP 2400+
Speed - 1999 MHz

Local Disk Total Capacity: 76.68 GB
Sum of Hard Disks: [C]
Used: 11.16 GB: Free: 65.51 GB

******************************************************************

Security Information

AVG 7.0 Professional.
Ewido Security Suite.
Process Guard.
Windows KB.
A2Scan.
Ad-Aware SE Personal.
Spybot S&D
Spyware Blaster.
Spyware Guard.
Port Explorer.
Super Winspy
Registry Mechanic.
Crap Cleaner.

*****************************************************************


Gentlemen/Ladies,

Today, I defragmented my ‘C’ drive with Windows XP Pro defragmenter.

There was a report:

>Defragmentation is complete for [C:]. Some files on this volume could not be defragmented. Please check the defragmentation report for the list of these files<

So I did, and this is it.

Volume (C:)
Volume size = 76.68 GB
Cluster size = 4 KB
Used space = 12.29 GB
Free space = 64.39 GB
Percent free space = 83 %

Volume fragmentation
Total fragmentation = 0 %
File fragmentation = 0 %
Free space fragmentation = 0 %

File fragmentation
Total files = 60,789
Average file size = 343 KB
Total fragmented files = 2
Total excess fragments = 26
Average fragments per file = 1.00

Pagefile fragmentation
Pagefile size = 768 MB
Total fragments = 1

Folder fragmentation
Total folders = 5,560
Fragmented folders = 1
Excess folder fragments = 0

Master File Table (MFT) fragmentation
Total MFT size = 73 MB
MFT record count = 67,357
Percent MFT in use = 90 %
Total MFT fragments = 3

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fragments File Size Files that cannot be defragmented
19 73 KB \WINDOWS\system32\pghash.dat



Before I decided to ask you why the >system32\pghash.dat< file cannot be defragmented, I poked about and the following script appeared. Now, I cannot remember how I arrived at the script, but I am sure that it is relevant.

>Displays the path and name of the most fragmented files on the volume and number of fragments, those files are in. If you use these files frequently there might be a large impact on your system performance.<

Because I have no idea how frequently I shall use the >system32\pghash.dat< file, I’m wondering if my computer will suffer if I carry on regardless..

How serious is a failure to defragment a file, or files ?

I there anything that can be done to rectify the problem ?

Yours sincerely,

oldsoldier

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 River_Rat

River_Rat

  • Members
  • 773 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SW Oklahoma - USA
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 16 August 2005 - 01:58 PM

It is not uncommon for windows not to defrag. fragments of files of running programs.
This appears to be a Process Guard program file.
Do you have Process Guard installed?

#3 Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Members
  • 5,898 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Florida, USA
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 16 August 2005 - 02:11 PM

Your pagefile size should be 1 and a half times the RAM you have installed.

#4 tromba1

tromba1

  • Members
  • 6 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 16 August 2005 - 03:33 PM

Ref: http://www.xpforum.co.uk/forum/archive.php...2-released.html

File is protected by Process Guard. See under "Driver Changes"

#5 oldsoldier

oldsoldier
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 60 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:County Durham, UK
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 16 August 2005 - 03:42 PM

Good evening,

Thank you for your interest and advice.

RiverRat - Yes, I do have Process Guard installed.

Enthusiast - How do I adjust the page file size so it is one and a half times the size of the installed RAM ? Easy steps please !

oldsoldier

#6 River_Rat

River_Rat

  • Members
  • 773 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SW Oklahoma - USA
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 16 August 2005 - 04:44 PM

If you have 512mb ram installed then your pafefile is already 1 1/2 times.
If you have not adjusted your pagefile then Windows is probably handling it which is the best thing if one doesn't know how to do it themselves.

Right Click My Computer>Properties>Advanced Tab>Performance Settings>Advanced Tab>Virtual Memory Change

http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm

#7 oldsoldier

oldsoldier
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 60 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:County Durham, UK
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 17 August 2005 - 02:51 PM

I am wondering if my page file size should be increased. This computer is not yet a year old and I doubled the size of RAM because I have to move large documents. But even though there is 1g memory, I have been told, when I am copying and pasting, that there is insufficient memory and I should close windows and save work. But that has happened when I am not moving large documents. Today, for example, I copied an ordinary Bleeping Computer page and went to paste it into a New Microsoft Windows Document, and I received a message > There is insufficient memory or disc space. Close extra windows and save your work<. So I copied only a quarter of the page and pasted it into the same Word document, and there was no complaint. That does not happen very often, but if this computer should have a larger page file size, and would run more efficiently if it had one, I would certainly think it over.

On a scale of 1 – 10, how difficult is it to increase page size and, can mistakes, made during the process, be reversed ?

Is it a task for a semi novice ?

Regards

oldsoldier

#8 Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Members
  • 5,898 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Florida, USA
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 17 August 2005 - 05:53 PM

It is relatively easy.

Open Control Panel | System | Advanced, click Settings in the “Performance” Section. Click on the "Performance Options" box.

The current total physical size of all page files that may be in existence is shown.
Click "Change" to make changes of settings for the Virtual memory operation.

Here you can select any drive partition and set the size of the page file to be larger than it is.

#9 oldsoldier

oldsoldier
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 60 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:County Durham, UK
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 17 August 2005 - 08:06 PM

Dear Enthusiast:

I followed your directions and became stuck, so I went this way -

Control Panel > System >Advanced Tab < clicked Settings in the Performance box > clicked Advanced Tab > Clicked Change in the Virtual Memory box and arrived at the Virtual Memory window.

The Virtual Memory window has –

Drive ‘C’
Paging file size = 768 - 1536 MB
Space available = 67645 MB

Custom size is ticked [green dot in small circle]
Initial size [MB] (in a small box) = 768
Maximum size [MB] (in a small box) = 1536

System managed - is not ticked
No page file - is not ticked

Total paging file size for all drives
Minimum allowed = 2 MB
Recommended = 1534 MB
Currently allocated = 768 MB


Clicked the SET box and a message appeared –

>>If the Pagefile on Volume C was an initial size of less than 1023 MB then the system may not be able to create a debugging information file if a STOP error occurs. Continue anyway? <<

I clicked No and was back at the Virtual Memory Page.

I clicked YES and was back at the Virtual Memory Page.

Nothing changed.

I have seen nothing about drive partitions. Only about drive ‘C’.

Do I have to decide upon a new Initial size [MB] and a new Maximum size [MB], and delete the existing sizes which are in the small boxes in the Virtual Memory window, and type in the new sizes ?

What should new sizes be ?

What happens next. ?

P.S. The sixtyfour thousand dollar question is – Is what I am contemplating doing, a good idea ?

Will System Restore get me out of a hole if this blows up in my face ? I'm a coward.

#10 Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Members
  • 5,898 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Florida, USA
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 17 August 2005 - 10:25 PM

Changing the pagefile to make it larger will give you no problems.

If you had a slave hard drive your system will run faster if you put the page file on it, but a partitioned virtual drive will not make a difference as far as I know.

>>If the Pagefile on Volume C was an initial size of less than 1023 MB then the system may not be able to create a debugging information file if a STOP error occurs. Continue anyway? <<


Click "yes" and make the smaller number 1500 MB, the larger 2000MB.

I clicked No and was back at the Virtual Memory Page.

I clicked YES and was back at the Virtual Memory Page.

Nothing changed.


That's because you need to change the numbers in the box.

I have seen nothing about drive partitions. Only about drive ‘C’.


Do you have a second hard drive? A real, physical drive, not a partition?
If you do, move the pagefile to the second hard drive, but only if it is a real, physical hard drive, not a virtual drive made by a partition.

Do I have to decide upon a new Initial size [MB] and a new Maximum size [MB], and delete the existing sizes which are in the small boxes in the Virtual Memory window, and type in the new sizes ?
What should new sizes be ?


Yes - 1500MB and 2000MB

#11 oldsoldier

oldsoldier
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 60 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:County Durham, UK
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 18 August 2005 - 04:44 AM

Q. Do you have a second hard drive? A real, physical drive, not a partition? If you do, move the pagefile to the second hard drive, but only if it is a real, physical hard drive, not a virtual drive made by a partition. <<

A. This computer does not have a second hard drive.

I can see nothing about partitions in the Virtual Memory window. Just ‘C’ drive.

Am I missing something ?

I am tempted to change the sizes to 1500MB and 2000MB, and click APPLY and see what happens.

Should I ?

oldsoldier

#12 oldsoldier

oldsoldier
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 60 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:County Durham, UK
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 19 August 2005 - 11:41 AM

A faint heart ne'er won a fair lady.

Plucked up courage and did it.

Many thanks for the advice and guidance.

oldsoldier

#13 Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Members
  • 5,898 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Florida, USA
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 20 August 2005 - 09:33 AM

Q. Do you have a second hard drive? A real, physical drive, not a partition? If you do, move the pagefile to the second hard drive, but only if it is a real, physical hard drive, not a virtual drive made by a partition. <<

A. This computer does not have a second hard drive.

I can see nothing about partitions in the Virtual Memory window. Just ‘C’ drive.

Am I missing something ?

I am tempted to change the sizes to 1500MB and 2000MB, and click APPLY and see what happens.

Should I ?

oldsoldier

"I am tempted to change the sizes to 1500MB and 2000MB, and click APPLY and see what happens."

YES!

#14 oldsoldier

oldsoldier
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 60 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:County Durham, UK
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 20 August 2005 - 10:28 AM

Many many thanks Enthusiast. The last two replies have crossed in the post. Folk who follow these topics may have thought that I was making a mountain out of a molehill, but I would rather err on the side of caution.

oldsoldier

#15 Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Members
  • 5,898 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Florida, USA
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 20 August 2005 - 05:44 PM

Did it resolve the problem?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users