Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!vsnyder
From: vsnyder@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Van Snyder)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st.tech
Subject: Re: Defragger
Message-ID: <1991Feb22.215823.29422@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: 22 Feb 91 21:58:23 GMT
References: <1991Feb15.231336.4325@mentorg.com> <1991Feb21.191927.6628@uvm.edu>
Reply-To: vsnyder@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Van Snyder)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Lines: 24

In article <1991Feb21.191927.6628@uvm.edu> pegram@kira.UUCP (Robert B. Pegram) writes:
>From article <1991Feb15.231336.4325@mentorg.com>, by 
>dclemans@mentorg.com (Dave Clemans @ APD x1292):
>1. Write the fats and directories asap (as you move the files) instead
>of at the end of everything - PC defraggers do that and can be stopped
>in the middle of things and lose nothing...

I suggested to Norton that they modify SD to write files temporarily into the
HIGHEST numbered free cluster instead of the LOWEST numbered free cluster.
The effect of stashing a file in the LOWEST numbered free cluster is that it
gets moved over and over and over and over and over ... again.  Stashing it
in the HIGHEST numbered free cluster increases head motion, but reduces the
probability it'll have to be moved again before being moved to its final
resting place.  Overall, it should make the de-fragger substantially faster.

I hope to see a de-fragger of the kind desired by Pegram, with the above
modification to the algorithm.

Van.

-- 
vsnyder@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov
ames!elroy!jato!vsnyder
vsnyder@jato.uucp