eanfrid wrote:I agree with DrHu. Defragmentation tools are not needed on modern file systems (and modern hardware). Fragmentation occurs though, but its impact is very negligible.
Indeed, unless your use any version of FAT or early releases of NTFS, you don't have to defrag anything because access times, read/write speeds, buffers and caches on today's devices and computers combined with modern file systems performances completely override the need for it.
Defrag tools are now just placebos, either on Windows or Linux.
eanfrid wrote:You take an example of absurdly high level of fragmentation, close to 100%, to make your point In the real life, this is no point: cache and buffers win the game the very most of the time. However, there is always a performance difference between reading/writing many small files in a row and reading/writing only one big file but this is an I/O performance, file system features and access time matter, not a single-file fragmentation matter, whatever are the OS and the underlying storage technology.
eanfrid wrote:I was talking about OS/FS cache/buffers in RAM, not about drive cache Anyway talking about the need of a defragmention tool under any modern OS (sorry XP is far from modern) is like talking about religion. I understand your point.
As yours, my point is based on my own professional experience in IT. Most of the time, under mainstream use (desktop - gaming), defragmentation tools are not needed at all. For servers and users manipulating/editing huge files (architects, video editors and so on), fragmentation can indeed be a problem because the best friend of fragmentation is low available disk space. In either case, most of the issues are leveled with more RAM for caching and faster/bigger disks. But once again, it is not a common use of a modern desktop computer.
Edit: BTW each time I try "e4defrag -c" on my machines, it never tells me I have to defrag anything
Fragmentation is inherent to any file-system activity. Whatever OS you use. But native Linux file-systems handle file fragmentation in a better way than Windows ever did.
Shake is a defragmenter that runs in userspace, without the need of patching the kernel and while the system is used (for now, on GNU/Linux only).
There is nothing magic in that : it just works by rewriting fragmented files. But it has some heuristics that could make it more efficient than other tools, including defrag and, maybe, xfs_fsr.
Fragmentation is generally kept to an insignificant value under Linux and does not hamper normal operations.
So, if fragmentation gets unnoticed, why bother with a defrag tool ? (this is what this poll means, indeed).
As I said before, there are always exceptions, on databases servers, on very large files operations or before resizing a partition for example, where a defrag tool can sometimes be useful. But the true responsible for file fragmentation is the lack of disk space: the more your HDD partition gets filled, the more your files will get fragmented, beginning with the bigger ones. Compared to HDD, SSD are clearly the winners on this part, too.
Thunderbird is not a parangon of optimized performance and such a huge profile size is playing with fire, for sure.So i have for example an Thunderbird profile which is alone 21GB in size
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 4 guests