The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    diskeep defrag question

    Discussion in 'Windows OS and Software' started by joshyjosh, Oct 29, 2006.

  1. joshyjosh

    joshyjosh Notebook Guru

    Reputations:
    1
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    I was using diskeeper 10 to defrag c drive to laptop I setup programs on and it said health was degraded, following reason 1. volume is heavily fragmented. So I defraged the c drive with it then hit analyze again and it said same thing after a defrag, its a 80gb partition with 15gb in use. Am I doing something wrong?
     
    joshyjosh, Oct 29, 2006
    #1
  2. Bobmitch

    Bobmitch Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    247
    Messages:
    2,038
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    55
    OK...here's what you do:

    Open Diskeeper 10

    Go to Configure Diskeeper...then Diskeeper Configuration properties...

    Click on Fragshield...MFT settings

    Choose to Edit the Fragshield / MFT Settings

    Look for the MFT settings on your C: drive. Use the default settings that Diskeeper offers and choose OK. It might take a few minutes for Diskeeper to set itself up...with the new settings. Reboot the machine and run Diskeeper again. Now you should get a green checkmark with a healthy status in Diskeeper...

    Bob
     
    Bobmitch, Oct 29, 2006
    #2
  3. Qhs

    Qhs Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    40
    Messages:
    666
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Fragshield will only work if you have more than 20% free space so make sure you have that.
     
    Qhs, Oct 29, 2006
    #3