Re: Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- From: "Gene E. Bloch" <hamburger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 23:29:14 -0500
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:133gth5j1bcdef0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
"Doc" wrote ...
"Richard Crowley" wrote:
"Doc" wrote ...
I defragged my capture drive and then captured a DV file of
about 10
gigs, making no cuts or changes to the file. Now after this
one capture, the defrag utility is showing the drive as highly
fragmented
again and should be defragged.
Why is this? I thought it would be simply laying down a
contiguous file and wouldn't cause fragmentation.
If it makes a difference, running XP with all drives NTFS.
Did you actually look at the display showing where the remaining
files were located? One of my complaints with most de-fragging
untilities is that they only group the file segments all
together, and
do nothing to fill in the odd empty spaces between the
(defragged) files. When a new file is created/written it is
just stuffed into all
the little empty spaces and becomes instantly fragmented.
If you mean the graphic display created by the defrag utility,
after defragging it shows the files as blue, though there are
gaps in the blue bar.
Yes, and those gaps are where a new file will be written.
And you instantly have a fragmented file.
I'm using the defrag utility that comes with XP. I don't see
any options within it as to "how" to defrag.
And that is the source of the problem. The defrag utility that
comes with XP is a crippled version of a commercial product
and has the "compacting" function disabled.
I wasn't aware there was more than one way to do it.
With the defrag that comes with XP, there aren't any options.
But it is certainly not the only available solution. 3rd party
vendors offer defrag options that address this deficiency.
For no particular reason, I was speculating the other day about how
Windows and other OSes handle the 'free list', i.e., the index to
the unused 'clusters' (or whatever a given FS calls the allocation
units) on the disk. I thought I'd chime in in this thread with what
I wondered. It's timely for me, at least :-)
It wouldn't surprise me if, as files are deleted (temp files
included, and pieces that get discarded from files being modified),
their clusters would be just added on to one end of the list, and it
also wouldn't surprise me if as new clusters were allocated, they
just were grabbed from the same or the other end of the list.
That would guarantee that files would be fragmented, since all the
above mentioned activity happens asynchronously, so the n clusters
at the end of the free list going to your video file might come from
n different files that were in as many different places, if your
karma isn't top-notch...
I have reason to believe that sort of thing happened in the old
days, but I'd like to believe that modern file systems have evolved
to a more orderly - and efficient - method.
Of course, I have no accurate idea, as you all will easily believe
:-)
--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino) ... letters617blochg3251
(replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom")
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- From: Richard Crowley
- Re: Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- From: Povl H. Pedersen
- Re: Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- References:
- Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- From: Doc
- Re: Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- From: Richard Crowley
- Re: Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- From: Doc
- Re: Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- From: Richard Crowley
- Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- Prev by Date: Re: Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- Next by Date: AVC Media Players
- Previous by thread: Re: Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- Next by thread: Re: Why does recording a DV file fragment the drive?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
