Re: hdd defrag
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 12:12:40PM -0500, Hank Barta wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 08:28:03PM -0700, idalton@ferret.phonewave.net wrote:
> >
> > Maybe it would be safer to just copy everything to another drive and use that?
>
> The stock answer for any Unix like partition (and probably any OS)
> is to backup using something that understands files, recreate the file
> system and reload. When the files are reloaded from tape or whatever,
> they will remain as unfragmented as the OS and FS drivers allow.
>
> >
> > hmm, I need to repartition anyway, my 17GB root partition is too big...
>
> And you will automatically defrag if you backup/restore or copy.
>
> Does anyone know any reasons why this may no longer be a good idea?
> I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned.
>
Well, I pretty much did in my previous message. In this case the media would be
a hard drive, and depending on the cercumstatces, the target drive could be
use from then on...
The main reason that this doesn't come up very often is because it doesn't
look as easy as just running a defrag.
In this case, windows is more advanced in defragmenting because it has been
needed a _lot_ more than on unix. On windows, it is common to defrag daily
or weekly. On unix, it is common to never do it, or to have it happen to be
done yearly or so from replaced/upgraded drives.
Mike
Reply to: