• Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    12 days ago

    Pro tip: Defragmenting only works on spinning drives because it puts the data nearer to the spindle so seek times are shorter. Solid-state drives wear out faster if you defragment them, since every write involves a little bit of damage.

    • vocornflakes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      12 days ago

      I was about to throw hands, but then I learned something new about how SSDs store data in pre-argument research. My poor SSDs. I’ve been killing them.

    • Alawami@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      Random reads are still slower than sequential in SSD. try torrenting for a year on SSD, then benchmark then defragment then benchmark. it will be very measureable difference. you may need some linux filesystem like XFS as im not sure if there is a way to defrag SSDs in windows.

      • LazerFX@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 days ago

        That’s because the drive was written to its limits; the defrag runs a TRIM command that safely releases and resets empty sectors. Random reads and sequential reads /on clean drives that are regularly TRIMmed/ are within random variance of each other.

        Source: ran large scale data collection for a data centre when SSDs were relatively new to the company so focused a lot on it, plus lots of data from various sectors since.

        • Alawami@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          I’m pretty sure running XFS defrag will defrag without trimming no matter the type of block device.

          Edit: yea you might actually be right. I Played with my fstab too much years ago, and never thought of that untill now

          • LazerFX@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 days ago

            I understood that XFS automatically mounted SSD’s with XFS_XFLAG_NODEFRAG set? Is this not the case?

            • Alawami@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 days ago

              yea you might actually be right. I Played with my fstab too much years ago, and never thought of that until now

              But does that flag affect manually running xfs_fsr?

              • LazerFX@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 days ago

                According to the man(8) page, it will avoid touching any blocks that have the chattr -f flag set, which is XSR_XFLAGS_NODEFRAG… So I think if the docs are still accurate to the code, yes.

                A lot of ifs in that assumption.

    • lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 days ago

      Pro tip: That tip has been obsolete for a long time now. Running the defragmentation tool on an SSD in Windows optimizes the drive (pretty much just running TRIM). It’s not possible to defragment an SSD in Windows (maybe there is a way using some register hack but that’s out of scope)

    • TheKMAP@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 days ago

      Defragging is about… defragging: making the data contiguous (a continuous stream along one arc of the same radius) so it doesn’t have to jump around.

    • lseif@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 days ago

      well, defragging my ssd was the only thing that let me shrink the windows partition safely when i dualbooted… tho maybe thats just windows being funky

      • floofloof@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 days ago

        You just don’t want to do it regularly. It was an issue for a brief time when SSDs were new, but modern operating systems are smart enough to exclude SSDs from scheduled defrags.

      • RonSijm@programming.dev
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 days ago

        Defragging an SSD on a modern OS just runs a TRIM command. So probably when you wanted to shrink the windows partition, there was still a bunch of garbage data on the SSD that was “marked for deletion” but didn’t fully go through the entire delete cycle of the SSD.

        So “windows being funky” was just it making you do a “defragmentation” for the purpose of trimming to prepare to partition it. But I don’t really see why they don’t just do a TRIM inside the partition process, instead of making you do it manually through defrag

        • lseif@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 days ago

          i used Defraggler, after nothing else worked to allow diskmgmt to shrink it, including all the normal stuff like disabling page files, snapshots, etc. it shows me how it was reordering parts of the ssd.

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 days ago

        That kinda makes sense. Putting all the partition sectors together would probably make it easier to resize. But as standard maintenance it’s like changing the oil on an electric car.

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    11 days ago

    EXT4 watching NTFS solve its fragment problem by upgrading to SSDs instead of upgrading their allocation algorithm.