could GHOST fast defragment HD?

[DZM]

I am thinking that GHOST could fast defragment HD ---
1. Copy from main PC's HD to Backup HD using GHOST
2. RESTORE from Backup HD to PC using GHOST

could this be faster way to defragment?

 

[djnes]

Considering that Diskeeper takes under a minute to defrag a huge drive, why would you go through the trouble of doing this? That's like asking if a 747 will get you to the grocery store faster.

 

[Jr. Woodchuck]

I am thinking that GHOST could fast defragment HD ---
1. Copy from main PC's HD to Backup HD using GHOST
2. RESTORE from Backup HD to PC using GHOST

could this be faster way to defragment?

Why do you feel that ghosting an image of your HD and then restoreing that image back to your HD will actually change anything? When you restore the image of your HD it puts everything back the way it was. I would assume (though i've never bothered to notice) that this places the files where they were back at the time of the image. Thus in your case not helping you a bit.

 

[DZM]

Why do you feel that ghosting an image of your HD and then restoreing that image back to your HD will actually change anything? When you restore the image of your HD it puts everything back the way it was. I would assume (though i've never bothered to notice) that this places the files where they were back at the time of the image. Thus in your case not helping you a bit.

I think when GHOST copies, it copies file by file, not sector by sector, that is what I see from the displays of GHOST software.

 

[djnes]

I still don't get why you just don't use a defrag utility.

 

[DZM]

I still don't get why you just don't use a defrag utility.

WINDOWS defrag is a slow process, because if doing it in a single drive (copy, write, read and rewrite) reduces the speed significantly --- particularly if you have a HD over 50% filled.

 

[MaMMa]

Considering that Diskeeper takes under a minute to defrag a huge drive, why would you go through the trouble of doing this? That's like asking if a 747 will get you to the grocery store faster.

i think disk keeper pro is a lie, im not sure but it feels that way. I've defragged with it many times and everytime it says there's an increase in speed in the results. I dont see how that could be. I defragged with O&O then right when i finished i went to Diskkepper and defragged, it still says something nice at the end. How can that be?

 

[djnes]

WINDOWS defrag is a slow process, because if doing it in a single drive (copy, write, read and rewrite) reduces the speed significantly --- particularly if you have a HD over 50% filled.

That's the problem. Who in their right mind would use the built in defragger? At least get Diskeeper Lite. It was free, and still should be.

 

[zeplar]

Can't say I've ever used Ghost strictly to defragment, but doing so could also defragment your pagefile. In all my images, Ghost automatically zeros out pagefile.sys, which makes perfect sense. Assuming Windows replaces it with a contiguous, appropriately sized pagefile, I guess. And of course, assuming you're Ghosting a drive with a pagefile.

It wouldn't necessarily prioritize oft used files like other defragmenters claim to do.

I believe I was told by Binary Research that older versions of Ghost would indeed defragment, so defragmenting before creating an image was unnecessary. Ghost 9 is a different engine though, I'm told.