https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/PageDefrag

PageDefrag is a program, developed by Sysinternals (now distributed by Microsoft), for Microsoft Windows that runs at start-up to defragment the virtual memory page file, the registry files and the Event Viewer's logs (files such as AppEvent.Evt, SysEvent.Evt, SecEvent.Evt and so on).

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897426

Runs on:

Client: Windows XP (32-bit)
Server: Windows Server 2003 (32-bit)

There are 3 similar sounding - but different utilities achieving different things.

Option 1. Disk/File Defragmentation

Disk/File defrag - tries to move files that are broken into multiple pieces together into a single contiguous piece (affects only the placement of these files on the hard drive). The contents of the files remain unchanged.

Option 2. Registry Defragmentation. (Defragment Registry Hives/Database)

Registry defragmentation - defragments the contents of each registry file to remove unused space (the empty gaps) that is created when information is deleted from the registry. It may be combined with a Disk/File defrag to further optimise access.

Option 3. Registry "cleaning".

Registry cleaning - changes the contents of the registry "files". Usually deleting data that appears incorrect or on some occasions correcting data contained in the registry. Does not Defrag Files or the Registry. (For some users this operation preceeds a complete reinstall of the operating system).

--------------
@hotdoge3 - re:PageDefrag.

from wikipedia:

PageDefrag does not defragment the contents of the registry files, only the placement of these files on the hard drive. Other utilities such as NTREGOPT can optimize the registry files.

PageDefrag runs on Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Server 2003. Though the website erroneously[1] says "runs on Windows XP (32-bit) and higher (32-bit), Windows Server 2003 (32-bit) and higher (32-bit)", the tool cannot defragment the pagefile on Windows Vista, Windows 7, or Server 2008; it is able to defragment registry hives on these versions.

Thanks mikiem2. Registry Defragmentation for Registry , PageDefrag for Page file some dont know it not the same.

Too much testing = too late a post in the comments, so in case it helps
---------

Registry Defragmentation does just that -- according to the web site it deletes empty spaces between stored data, much like the utility that comes with ERUNT [NTREGOPT.EXE], & it defrags the actual files. While it does do the 1st, rewriting registry data like NTREGOPT, I don't know if it relies on the newly written files to be unfragmented because they're freshly written, or if it actually defrags the new files in a 2nd step during the Windows re-start. In tests the re-written registry files are stored in Windows Temp folder, in my tests using [SysInternals] Contig.exe these fresh copies were unfragmented, a registry entry to run RegDefrag.exe is added to a RunOnce key with the Clear CLI switch, but deleting "Clear" those temp files were still deleted, & the registry's written to during Windows start, so I don't know how you'd find out if there was an actual defrag step or not. Running NTREGOPT after a defrag with today's GOTD, Before & After ERUNT backup folders were the same size in bytes, so apparently there was nothing additional for NTREGOPT to do -- Registry Defragmentation did its job well. Registry Defragmentation does have a couple of other features, but other than convenience I'm not sure if or why you'd want to use them... One does a backup using System Restore, the other provides a registry backup similar to ERUNT, but as far as I can tell without ERUNT's ability to restore a backup after booting to a command prompt &/or another OS. Testing in win7 64 I was also bothered by the fact that registry backups never seemed to be the same size, even running one after another, & they were always smaller comparing file to file with ERUNT backups, though in tests restoring these backups worked. Maybe certain keys like MRUCache are filtered out?

Registry Defragmentation itself is small, with 37 files, 1 folder, ~4 MB in the "Registry Defragmentation" program folder. New registry entries = 1 for uninstall, + 2 program keys under HKCU, & 1 key under HKLM. The md5 for RegistryDefragmentation.zip = 8e35908589ed3f09bb8cf0fb864281f2 . In terms of practicality, I'm not sure why most people won't continue using ERUNT & NTREGOPT, but Registry Defragmentation does let you select just what portions of the registry you want to work with, & that may be a benefit to some.

-----------

#16: "For those who say defragmenting isn’t necessary. You are half correct. It really depends on how new or how old your hard drive is. While defragmenting an older hard drive will provide significant increase in performance, defragmenting a newer hard drive will not. Why? Because newer hard drives operate at 7200 to 10,000 rpms’."

FWIW, the drives I see on sale that are most popular are very often 5400 rpm, keeping cost down & capacity up -- After all, RAM's fairly cheap & SSDs take the place of small, 10k rpm drives. As far as when to defrag, it's kinda like when do you vacuum or wash your car? Some keep it spotless, others wait until it's dirty. :-) Some people like to keep a defrag app running in the background, or as a screensaver etc. -- they don't *Need* to, but they like it that way. Other folks wait till stuff starts slowing down, sort of the equivalent of someone writing Wash Me in the dirt on your back window. If you don't want to wait that long, Windows &/or most defrag apps will tell you how bad things are before they do anything, so you be the judge.

* * *

#23: "You can not compact the registry while windows is running, period. All compaction must be done before windows loads. This software is not proper for compacting the windows registry."

The idea's rather simple, as explained with ERUNT -- you read all the data in the registry, which means skipping any/all spaces, & rewrite it to new files. During a re-start the new files are swapped for old. In fact you do the same thing restoring an ERUNT backup, as it's written the same way, without blank data. Maybe another way to think of or demonstrate the idea is create a new text file, open it in Notepad, & press the Enter key a hundred times before you type "Test". Save it & open another new text file and type test on the 1st line & save. Now compare file sizes in Properties. Reserving a space for data, whether you enter any actual data or not, takes up room.

* * *

#25: "... how much space is actually saved by using this program. With the sizes (and speeds) of today’s hard drives how much difference does it really make. I can see using it as a possible fix to try if a computer is REALLY slow and hanging up but as a weekly preventive maintenance program I wonder…"

The idea very basically is this: open both an empty .TXT file & one with 20 MB worth of content in Notepad -- which opens faster? If the registry is smaller, that's better. Will it make a huge difference? Probably not -- best to think of it like eating a healthier diet... cut the calories just a bit in one meal, you'll never notice, but cut the calories a little bit in every meal, every day, & you'll probably not gain as much weight longer term.

* * *

#26: "... It would appear that Elcor is locking up these structures while manipulating them... Nothing beats SysInternal’s PageDefrag... PageDefrag only fully supports up to XP..."

I believe that Registry Defragmentation simply writes copies of the registry file, then swaps them out on re-start, same as the ERUNT apps -- I don't know how you would confirm whether it did a separate defrag or not, whether during the writing process or before swapping etc.

PageDefrag OTOH is a bit old, having not been re-written or re-visited in years, despite other SysInternals utilities sometimes being updated a few times a year... Could that be an indication it's not really that useful? As Microsoft details here, it's not a big deal to have Windows delete the paging file on exit -- wouldn't a freshly written file tend to be unfragmented from the start, plus you've got the security benefits -- export the registry key the KB talks about set both on/off & you could delete the page file once a week or once a month if you'd rather.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314834#appliesto

Thanks, Mike.

I agree that Service Packs are generally a good idea, and Vista SP1 has been well received. The main reason I haven't installed it is because Update won't push it to me. Even M$ suggests that it's safer to use the update push than risk installing the standalone, so I've been trying to determine why it won't push. I haven't had the time to finish troubleshooting it, but, according to a KB article, it appears Update won't push it to me because it senses I have incompatible drivers. In which case, I couldn't use it, anyway. The potentially ridiculous thing is that my digging seems to show that the incompatible drivers it senses aren't being used in my system, but are in driver storage! But I've haven't gotten around to removing them yet and seeing if that fixes it. I've got one other thing I meant to try first, but haven't gotten around to it and I've currently got bigger fish to fry.

I've got to install Linux! Vista is fine when it's working, but MS just doesn't understand the value of simplicity. They just heap half understood layer on top of half understood layer and then appoint countless development teams to try and smooth out the mess. I suspect most don't even know what the others are up to. So the poor user ends up chasing his/her tale. I can hardly believe how many dozens of Windows error codes I've looked up that even Microsoft hasn't posted an explanation for. In fact, I've found most of my lists of error codes from non-MS sources.

To quote Confucius: "Simplicity is difficult. Complication is easy."

Unfortunately.

Hi watcher13,
Yes, I have SP1 and respond to inquiries based on the assumption that all current Microsoft updates have been applied. As evidenced by your reply, this is not always a valid assumption. I would recommend strongly that you do get caught up on critical updates as there have been quite a few issues addressed in SP1 and subsequent releases(including MS OFFICE if used) that are essential for protecting you from exploits that are currently in the wild. The malware developers never seem to sleep and you can't predict when you may become a victim of an attack, especially when many of these attacks can be defeated by simply updating Windows...

Be safe out there ;)

Mike

Mike,
Yes, I have been using my Administrator account to try and do some repairs. Actually, I believe we're both right and I found the answer to why:
http://www.vista4beginners.com/Disk-Defragmenter-from-Windows-Vista-SP1
According to this article, it's another example of MS deciding that it was smarter than it's users and it's users couldn't be trusted to handle "complex" computing (maybe they should change their name to Apple, LOL). Apparently, the ability to select drives was removed in Vista, then, (surprise, surprise) because of user complaints, was reactivated in SP1. So I'm assuming you've got SP1 installed. I haven't taken the plunge, yet. If this isn't the case, let me know and I'll research it further. I believe that's the answer, though, since I've now found two articles - with screenshots - that are telling me what I'm seeing is normal. Glad you mentioned it, since now I know I'll get that capacity back whenever I get around to installing SP1. It looks like it was all part of the general strip down of the tool, which also removed the analyzer to tell you how defragged the disk was, the time estimate, and the graphical representation. Though, I can understand the last, since giving a graphic of view of defragging gigs and, for some, teras gets increasingly impractical. Still, thank you MS for treating us like children. Like when they hid SFC.

In any case, thanks again.

Hi watcher13,
Are you logged in as administrator? I detailed my reply using my copy of Vista Home Basic as reference which is a "lesser" version than the one you are using and the option is there on my test system. I don't have a copy of Home Premium to test with here so it may be different in this respect but I would be surprised if the Basic had extra features that Premium would not have. Worth a bit of digging at Microsoft if it is different that way before you suspect an OS corruption...

@Frique

"On a different note, keep working on AlexSJ's suggestion..."

Reply: We are looking at this but the implementation is going to be limited to the physical reality of Windows and how RVS controls the disk. At some point in the 3x series we are going to explore protection status based on user permissions (Admin? Limited user? etc) but any solution will mean that the protection will be on for everyone regardless of preference if there is more than one person logged into the computer at the same time. For security reasons, the most restrictive preference would hold priority...

Mike

Mike, I greatly appreciate you taking the time to answer our questions. I obviously didn't frame the question very well the first time. Now that we're getting on the same page, your succint replies have answered my question. I now know how to safely defrag without running into the problem that Frique unfortunately had.

A couple of notes:
I'm afraid you'll have to see if anybody else reports problems with command line defragging of Z:. I don't trust my results. About a month ago, I had a power failure while Windows Update was doing a shut down install. As I understand it, that's one way to potentially bang your heads on your disc. Doesn't seem to be any permanent physical damage, but I have significant corruption. That may be why nothing happens when I type defrag z: while it's mounted. I can't run chkdsk from the command line, either, and I'm sure that's because of the corruption.

And, just for your reference, because I know you get questions dealing with all the OSs:
Thanks for the tip on running the defrag gui, but it doesn't seem to work that way in Vista Home Premium. I get the same option from the Control Panel as when I activate it from the System Tool Menu. Just the Defragment Now button (and a scheduling option) and no option to select drives that I can find. Actually, I believe that's normal for Vista. Here's an article on Vista defragging that has a screen shot of what I see:

http://www.vista4beginners.com/Disk-Defragmenter

Or maybe it's just another symptom of the corruption.

In any case, thanks again. Returnil is an excellent product! I certainly recommend it for software testing, and it's, obviously, useful for surfing.

Hi Mike,

As far as I know, there is no encryption on any of my drives. We don't have anything to worry about really. Our main tasks are gaming, surfing the net, and burning discs. Basically, your typical home user. I know that the D drive was originally a factory partition for a trial version of Norton Ghost, but Norton Ghost never worked properly for us so we uninstalled it. I then erased the backup files on drive D and I have been using it to store large files ever since. It is the same format as the C drive, so that should not be a factor.

On a different note, keep working on AlexSJ's suggestion. I would love to see that feature since I have 2 teenage boys who love to find sites they should not. Sometimes I forget to turn the protection back on after updating the system or antivirus program. They are usually pretty good about turning it on again, but it would be nice if it came on automatically for their limited accounts. Again, thanks for your patience. Sincerely,

Frique

Hi,

@ Frique:

Q1: “…I should be able to just select the C or D drives and defrag them without any harm to the system. Would that be a safe assumption?”

ANS: Yes

Q2: “…PS - I also noticed that the main drive (C) & the virtual drive (Z) were in black lettering, while the back-up drive (D) was in Blue lettering. I am not sure if that means anything or not…”

ANS: Is there a difference in encryption for the drives? (i.e., is the backup drive encrypted?)

@watcher13:

Q1: “…I've got two questions. If you mount Z: and then hit the "defragment now" button in the Vista gui, or run "defrag c:" from a command prompt with Z: mounted, will that safely defrag the drive?”

ANS: Yes

OBS1: “…I'm working under the impression there's no point in defragging anything other than Z: with protection on. I'm assuming the changes in other drives wouldn't be permanent, and that Z: can be defragged whether protection is on or off.”

Reply1: The only drive or partition you should not try to defragment with protection on is the System Partition (usually C:\) OR files, folders, and drives you have added to the File Protection list if the FP feature is activated. In the former case the exercise is fruitless and in the latter, the selected content and/or volumes are locked from access.

OBS2: “…But, in Vista you’re only given a single button to defrag all drives at once…”

Reply2: You can alter the settings and select which drives to defragment in Vista using the Advanced Tools menu:

Control Panel > System and Maintenance > Performance Information and Tools > Advanced Tools > Open Disk Defragmenter >> click "Continue" when challenged by the Vista UAC feature >> then click the “Select Volumes... option

Q2: “…My other question is: I can't get defragging Z: to work from the command prompt. With Z mounted it ignores the command and just kicks back to the command prompt without any explanation, regardless of the protection state.”

ANS: Does this happen with other drives or just the Returnil VP (Z:\)? If no, then it may indicate that the nature of the VP (file with special properties to simulate a physical drive) does not support defragmentation from the command line. Let me know and I will discuss with development…

@AlexSJ:

Q: “Is there a way to have a different start up configuration for Returnil for different users? Say Admin in Green, Guest user always in Red?”

ANS: No, once the protection is on, it’s on for everyone who logs into the computer. We are looking at ways to do this from a cold start of the system but for the immediate future you should approach the program as “one for all, all for one”…

Mike

Hello Mike: one question
Is there a way to have a different start up configuration for Returnil for different users? Say Admin in Green, Guest user always in Red?

Pura Vida, AlexSJ

Moderators, could you please remove my previous post ***post has been removed***? I did some experimenting and research and discovered info. that makes the above obsolete. I tried to edit it, but it was too late. Please replace it with the following:

Coldmoon, I, too appreciate your patience. I realize that part of the confusion is that the defragmenter options in Vista are different than in XP. I had only used XP at work and had never defragged. Looking at a screenshot of XPs defragger, I can see that you have the option of selecting which drives to defrag. I assume that's what you meant by excluding. But, in Vista your only given a single button to defrag all drives at once. I prefer to defrag from the command line because I can run an analysis from the command line. That way, I don't waste time defragging a drive that's, say, only 1% fragmented. And, of course, I can also choose which drive(s) to defragment.

I've got two questions. If you mount Z: and then hit the "defragment now" button in the Vista gui, or run "defrag c:" from a command prompt with Z: mounted, will that safely defrag the drive? I assume this is with protection off. I'm working under the impression there's no point in defragging anyting other than Z: with protection on. I'm assuming the changes in other drives wouldn't be permanent, and that Z: can be defragged whether protection is on or off.

My other question is: I can't get defragging Z: to work from the command prompt. With Z mounted it ignores the command and just kicks back to the command prompt without any explanation, regardless of the protection state.

Can you please clarify the safe methods to defrag in Vista to avoid the boot problem that Frique had, and the proper method to defrag Z: in Vista. It may also be I'm having some problem with my defragger. I'm currently trying to track down some other problems. Thanks for your help.

Coldmoon, I want to thank you for your patience. You must feel like a college professor trying to teach calculus to a 3rd grade student. I am still fuzzy about when a VP would be open or closed, but I think I can work around that. I was finally able to sneak onto the main comp today and check what the Windows Defrag tool showed. I did not defrag anything because I wish to install an image program before I attempt that, but I did notice something that might help. I started by turning off the system protection & restarting the computer. After it had restarted, I exited out of Returnil so that it was not running in the background. I then went to the system tools and found the disk defragmenting tool. It showed 3 drives: C, D, & Z. From what I have been able to gather in the previous posts, I should be able to just select the C or D drives and defrag them without any harm to the system. Would that be a safe assumption? We use the defragging tool that comes with XP. I have never tried using one of the 3rd party tools. Thank you again for your time and patience!

Frique

PS - I also noticed that the main drive (C) & the virtual drive (Z) were in black lettering, while the back-up drive (D) was in Blue lettering. I am not sure if that means anything or not. Probably not, but if anyone with knowledge can tell me why that is I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks.

@watcher13 and Frique

Sorry for the late reply on this. You need to focus on what the goal is: defragmenting the contents within the VP and not the VP itself. When the VP is dismounted it looks like a fragmented file because it is mostly empty space unless you have filled it up. Defraggers are not programmed to recognize this so they may cause unpredictable things to happen when they attempt to defragment the actual VP file.

This is why the contents of the VP should be defragmented when it is open (mounted) as a separate thing you do manually.

Q: "What do you define mounted or dismounted?"

ANS: Mounted = The VP is "opened" as though it were a real hard drive or portion of a hard drive (partition).

Dismounted = The VP is "closed" and is just a very large file with empty space.

Q: "If the system protection was turned off, but Returnil was still running would this cause the problem described in my first post?"

ANS: It should not cause any issues. The question becomes more complex when discussing third party defraggers as I have discussed previously. I apologize if it was confusing. As long as RVS protection is turned off there should not be any problem defragmenting your hard drives with the special exception of the VP.

Q: "The reason I ask is because she does not remember anything about a "Z" drive and being able to exclude it. "

ANS: If the VP was not mounted, then it would not be presented as a potential drive to defragment so she would not have seen it listed.

HTH
Mike

Hi again everyone.

Coldmoon, thanks for your patience. I regret that I am still a bit fuzzy on mounted/dismounted & open/closed. What do you define mounted or dismounted? My take on mounted is a seperate partition on the hard drive. If it is dismounted, I have gone through the steps (on the GUI) to dismount the virtual partition. This doesn't quite seem to jibe with what you have said.

As for defragging the computer, we only use the built in windows defragger. We are not familiar with the command prompts, so we reach it through the system tools menu. The wife usually does drive "C" because she doesn't use the "D" drive. I use it strictly for large files at the moment, but that will change when I am able to clear them off and install an imaging program.

If the system protection was turned off, but Returnil was still running would this cause the problem described in my first post? I have noticed that even when I turn the system protection off, the program runs in the background unless exited manually. The reason I ask is because she does not remember anything about a "Z" drive and being able to exclude it. I have not been able to check for myself because I cannot get onto that computer at the moment. I will check as soon as I get the opportunity, I just worry about accidentally crashing the system again. She would be very unhappy with me if I did that. Thank you for your patience.

Coldmoon, I've gotta be the stupidest guy in the room. I just don't get it. "The best approach is to exclude it from defragmentation when dismounted and to defragment it as a separate drive when mounted (i.e., you defragment what is inside of the VP rather than trying to defragment the VP itself)." Does that mean your fine with a command of "defrag c:" as long as you don't use the "Defragments all volumes on this computer" -c switch? Or do you have to use the "volume\mountpoint" syntax? I don't understand that particular syntax that's in defrag's command line help. My Windows Help and Support is currently messed up and I'm not finding the answers online.

In other words, Coldmoon, how to you safely do it? Do you just hit the defrag button in the GUI? I got the impression that's what Frique's wife did, at least under XP rather than my Vista, and you agreed that probably caused problems. Or do you think she typed in defrag c: -c in a command prompt? I'm not trying to be argumentative, and I appreciate your patience, but what is the syntax or proper method to exclude? All I know to do is to type defrag c:, defrag d: (I have a recovery partition) and now, I guess, defrag Z:, when I mount that drive. And again, does that work when the protection's off? At least when I tried to run an analysis, i.e. switch -a, with Z mounted and protection off, the Windows defragmenter didn't see it. How do you exclude?

Sorry I'm so dense.

Hi watcher13,
You should not have any issues using the built in Windows defragger. Just remember to turn protection off before dregramenting the System Partition.

Thanks, Coldmoon! You're not too long post really helped clarify. I think I somewhat understood the difference the between Z: and the virtual clone partition created in cache when I installed Returnil, but wasn't thinking straight when I read you're original posts. Though I wouldn't say I understood every nuance.

One question on defragging, though. If I understand you right, your defrag solution is is intended for third party defraggers, not the native Windows defragger. Unless the windows defragger has "exclusion" options that I'm missing. That's not a complaint, though, there are plenty of better defraggers out there. Just want to make sure I'm not missing something simple.

I pretty much just type in defrag into a command prompt because I like to do the analysis first to make sure I need to defrag. Vista has removed that option in the GUI. It's just on and off now. Since I don't use it much, maybe there's a way to exclude I'm not aware of. I was wondering if you couldn't simply mount Z with protection off and just the process of mounting it would cause it to be blocked from a "defrag c:" command. However, when I tried to run a framentation analysis that way, it didn't recognize Z, so I'm assuming that method wouldn't work. And trying to defrag c: inside protection even with Z mounted is probably pointless too, as I'm assuming the defrag tool would be blocked from really reaching into C to defrag. So, again, I'm concluding your method requires a 3rd party defragger.

Thanks for the info on partition size and the pointer to the Wilder forums. I'll check that out.

Hi Robert,
When you turn RVS protection on, the MBR is locked. This is a hardening feature against low level disk access

Mike

Hi Coldmoon.
I have one more question:Does Returnil write things in the MBR?If so,could they interfere with other programs that do the same?
Acronis does this in case you want to use a short key to restore when booting (optional setting)
EAZ-FIX did the same.

Hi All (Very long post warning),
Sorry for the delay in replying.

@Frique:

Q: “Thank you very much for your explanations. I have a question about what the computer sees as an unmounted drive. Does it see the drive as being unmounted when Returnil is turned off or just after I check the "unmount virtual drive" box and go through the subsequent steps?”

ANS: Glad I could help. A great deal of the vision we have for the future development of Returnil is helping as many as we can to learn the basics about virtualization and how it can help in their security strategy. You will begin to see where we are going with our development following the first generation 3x release which is in internal beta testing now…

Now to answer the actual question: no, and I will try to make this as easy as I can to follow. This will take a bit to explain as there are some things here that will require some prerequisites so please bear with me:

RVS is currently made up of three component “parts”: 1) The GUI (Graphical User Interface), 2) The System Protection feature, and 3) The Virtual Partition. The GUI lets you interact with the other two parts of the program with the other two being independent of one another. This means that the VP will work with or without the System Protection and visa-versa. Further, 2 and 3 will function regardless of whether the GUI is on or off and the independence of the GUI is why this would make no difference to whether the VP is mounted (open) or dismounted (closed).

When the VP is dismounted, it is a very large file with empty space on the System Partition (by default) or the same on another drive or partition (2.0.1). When it is mounted, and the VP is installed in its default location, it is no longer a file, but a “local drive” and appears as an immovable block in your defragger (assuming some sort of graphical display). The best approach is to exclude it from defragmentation when dismounted and to defragment it as a separate drive when mounted (i.e., you defragment what is inside of the VP rather than trying to defragment the VP itself).
@watcher13:

Q1: “I'm still also a little unclear as to this partition versus virtual drive concept, too.”

ANS: This is an entirely different topic if you are referring to the difference between the Virtual Partition and the Virtual System. The VP is simply a large file with special properties and a convenience feature for those with a single partition on their drives (i.e., C:\). Think of it as a virtual cubby-hole where you can store data and files when RVS protection is on so that it is not lost at restart.

The Virtual System is the entirety of what RVS does to create a clone of your Real System Partition. In essence it consists of the clone which is created and tracked within the cache. The cache can be thought of as RVS’s notebook.

Q2: “Sorry, Coldmoon, but I got a little lost in your explanation….”

ANS: I hope the above helps to clear some of this up. If not, let me know…

Q3: “Also, I may start another thread on partitioning. I've been relunctant to partition, partly because I'm not sure what sizes to make things… Coldmoon, I'm curious how you came up with the numbers you recommended to Frique. Is there a set magic number, like 40G that you like for Frique's situation (I assume he's running XP?) or is there a perferred ratio?”

ANS: No magic and not optimized. I used some very loose numbers based more on practice and experience with business computers over the years. The 40 GB has been a standard HDD size in the past and also provides a good compromise between the room Windows needs now and what it may need in the future. It also makes defragmentation of that partition faster when the defragger only needs to go through 40 GB, rather than hundreds of GBs. You might try taking some time and reading through threads that discuss partitioning at the Wilders security forums. Here is a wide range of discussions that detail various ways to configure your hard drive, Windows, data, and programs.

NOTE: Many topics are advanced so do your homework and don’t be afraid to ask questions…

Mike

Frique

I stopped using the split option to create and burn images directly on dvds.
Some programs did give a very large temp file on the restored drive, others just failed to restore the images and gave me a nice CRC failure.

The best way to do it:create split images ,right, but..on another drive/partition and burn them on dvds when they're created,so you can always put them back even on a newly partitioned drive.

About Returnil.
Coldmoon will probably correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you should look at it this way.
Returnil allows you to create a virtual partition,let's say 4 GB.Even if there's only 2 GB of data on it,Windows will still look at it as being 4 GB and thinks it's fragmented.
Yes,the best way to defrag would be with the VP.img mounted.
But remember the advice to install Returnil on a defragged system or even create the image file on another drive/partition.
If not I'd still go for deleting the VP.img,as described earlier(and defrag with Returnil's protection turned off).
The same goes for us fervent GOTD'ers that install a lotta good programs....

Thank you Watcher, for your kind words. I am indeed running Windows XP home edition. I have a 2.53 GHz Celeron D processor (The last of the single core processors. They started selling Dual core processors the month after I bought my computer.) and 1 Gb of RAM. I also have a 160 GB hard drive, but it is partitioned as described above. Heck, I even sprung for the 3.5" floppy drive! Nothing but the best for me!

I second Frique's last request and also thank you, Coldmoon for your insight (and Robert and all the other good folks). I'm still also a little unclear as to this partition versus virtual drive concept, too. And also about defragging. I was thinking of Z: as a kind of directory folder that you mount to transfer whatever can be copied/moved between the virtual and system partitions, but then I don't see why you would mount it to get a good defrag. I'm reading what you're saying as the Returnil partition in fact being Z:, but Windows mistakes the whole partition it as being a file if you don't mount Z. That may not be right, but it seems counterintuitive that you'd have anything that you could boot into that isn't "mounted" when you boot into it.

Sorry, Coldmoon, but I got a little lost in your explanation. There are parts that make me think you're saying something like: boot into Returnil, mount Z, then you can get a good defrag on Z:, in the rare situations when it actually gets fragmented. But is that also the best condition under which to defrag the other partitions, because it seems to me your saying you can't safely defrag your system partition without booting into Returnil and mounting Z? There are other parts of your posts that make me think you're saying something different, but I'm not sure what. And do you have any opinion on Whiterabbit's experience using diskkeeper? I read his post as saying he's not booting into returnil or doing anything special with it when he's defragging his system partition. As I understand it, Windows built-in is based on diskkeeper (Though I understand that doesn't mean it has the same ability/quality.).

Also, I may start another thread on partitioning. I've been relunctant to partition, partly because I'm not sure what sizes to make things, and I haven't found any good advice on the web, and partly because I don't currently have a another drive to save an image as a backup. I'm running Vista on a 224G hard drive in a slim line case, so any added drives would have to be external. Coldmoon, I'm curious how you came up with the numbers you recommended to Frique. Is there a set magic number, like 40G that you like for Frique's situation (I assume he's running XP?) or is there a perferred ratio? Since you made a recommendation to Frique, I'd like to pick your brain about where those numbers came from. I not against experimenting, but, as Otto Von Bismarck is reported to have said (he was probably quoting an older saying), "Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man learns from the mistakes of others." :) I liked to get things as near to being right the first time as I can.

Any insights would be greatly appreciated.

Hi again everyone. I would like to thank everyone for their help with this.

Robert; If I remember correctly I had to download Bart PE from the (Manufacturer's) website. Macrium gave the link to me, so it was easy enough to find. It was also more user friendly than the linux version. The big problem came when I tried to reinstall from the 9 DVDs that stored the image. Around disc 8 I had a cyclic redundancy error or something & could not finish the install. But that was the crash before this one. I completely forgot about it this time around. I also discovered that it did not like the fact that I put the image onto 9 DVDs. If I tried to load it straight from the DVDs it would tell me that part of the image was missing. I tried installing it onto drive D to get a whole image, but...

Coldmoon; Thank you very much for your explanations. I have a question about what the computer sees as an unmounted drive. Does it see the drive as being unmounted when Returnil is turned off or just after I check the "unmount virtual drive" box and go through the subsequent steps? The wife assures me that she turned Returnil off and restarted the computer before defragging the computer (and our crash.) I am not sure if she attempted to defragment the virtual partition as a file on "C" drive or as a system partition and she does not remember. If she did just defrag the "C" drive, would that read the "Z" drive as a file if Returnil was turned off? Please speak slowly for me. A little knowledge is dangerous and you might say that I am downright scary! I know exactly enough to get myself into a lot of trouble. Thanks again!

Peace.

Coldmoon, and AlexSJ, I did decide to remove Returnil from my (Compaq) computer. I think what I may do is install it on our lesser used Gateway computer, and learn it on there. Once I have learned 'the ropes' with it on that computer, I will consider reinstalling it on the Compaq, and then educate my family on what to do, and such. I am going to refer back to this thread/info when I do put Returnil on the Gateway, because you guys have given so much info. 'Course when that time does come around, I will likely be 'ringing your doorbells' for more info/clarifications...lol.

Sue

Hello Sue:
First off, I love Returnil and have used it ever since it was offered on GOTD. It has a lot of advantages, but also comes with some side effects.

Yours is a family setting, your computer is a shared one and from the way it sounds you have Returnil set up to be always in protected mode. That is the safest setting you can have, but you as computer administrator need to set a time apart for running all the updates in not protected mode.
What you need to make clear to all family members is that really EVERYTHING that affects the C: drive(or system drive) gets wiped out with a restart: that can be bookmarks in Explorer, recent history file list and game progress
and that what they want to keep they have to copy to the save partition.
You should have a separate partion on the pc from which you run all games and even Programs like Mike explained.

However, there are a lot of games and some programs that save their history under C:\Documents and Settings\Username\Program Files\... (Around the World in 80 days, Saqqarah, Arctic Quest)
In this case I use a File Synchronizer to copy those saved game files to another partion after playing and then copy them back when I play again.

In my personal setting I start all computers with Returnil in not protected mode, let the antivirus and all update and then switch the protection on. The same counts for my son's computer and HE KNOWS that he needs to put Returnil in RED before going anyplace on the web. He is disciplined with it, but still, we caught some crap in Dec. 2008 from a USB stick that got plugged in when PC was not yet protected.

Now, and since Mike was following the thread, the Returnil Startup setting is the same for all users. I would love it if it could be different by user: say as Admin I start in "Green", all other users start in "Red"

Anyway, I just installed Returnil on a friends computer (very small hard drive, no internet, but two adolescents who bring all kind of viruses home all the time). Since she is not pc savy, it's always in protected mode. The admin user has a password, the adolescents are supposed to use on the Guest user. Sure enough the first day, she put her smallest kid to study with the pc on the admin, then one of the two came and set up his own user. I said: jejejej - let him do that all he wants. You turn off the computer and wow, it's all gone. Thanks to Returnil

Pura vida, AlexSJ

Coldmoon, as Robert said, thanks for explaining Returnil to me, although it is confusing...lol. One of the problems for me using Returnil is that everyone in my family uses this computer, so all are/will be affected by Returnil's 'weird' ways. My husband was doing all kinds of griping yesterday because his game progress didn't save. He was asking me what happened to it (like *I* know...lol)! Moving along here, I installed FireFox 3, and got an update for FF 2 a while ago. Right now I've got this hourglass icon 'thing' on here - the one that turns over periodically - and I am wondering why. Seems like 'something' is busy, but I don't know what it is. I'm seriously thinking of just uninstalling Returnil. It may be a good thing to have, but requires a lot of learning, which may not be a bad thing IF I was the only one using this computer.

Sue

Coldmoon,
Sue's problems are likely to be those of many users.Thanks for your explanation and your involvement.

Frique,
When you use a BartPE cd you should be able to work in a windows environment when booting from it.
Was this an option in Macrium Reflect..or did you make your own BartPE cd using a Macrium plugin (amongst others)?