"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 28/03/16 12:18, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/03/2016 22:57, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 26/03/2016 09:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Well of course it is somewhat, but the point is that new files tend to
be written in the middle of the biggest free space, depending on the
actual disk format in use, so they tend to simply grow linearly.

Fragmentation isn't a file in a random place, its a file in dozens of
random places, so to get the entire contents takes many seeks.

http://www.howtogeek.com/115229/htg-...defragmenting/



Good link. Thanks.

The Windows guys chose to put all their files near the same end of the
disk to reduce seeks when the disk is nearly empty. Linux has a
different approach - they are scattered all over the place.

Andy

Almost true.
Linux uses different allocation strategies for different file system
types.
Not that they make much sense if the OS doesn't know the physical layout
of the disk, which it doesn't for SATA/IDE. The OS doesn't know if it
really is putting the stuff in the best place at all.

economical with the truth

"somewhere in London" is not the same as 'I dont know where he is'

And if that is true, why does windows need defragging on IDE and SATA
disks,

It doesnt.

since windows can't know where the data is either?

Doesnt need to to ensure that no file is fragmented
when defragging.