Windows XP System Maintenance

Hi,

I'm not sure if I'm in the right forum for this question; if not, so please feel free to move it.

At the company I work for, we are running Windows XP from a main server (sorry, I don't know the specifics beyond that) and most workstations (there are probably 20 of them) use Word 2003 to create/revise probably a thousand or more documents a week.

Our system is backed up once a week. I don't know how often (or even if) the server is defragmented and there is a difference of opinion between the office manager and my immediate superviser as to whether the individual workstations need to run defrag. Myself and other employees are constantly running into difficulties in terms of delayed startup/shutdown, files being corrupted, etc. etc. etc. Yesterday, I lost several documents that I worked on (my revisions were not there on reopening the files at other workstations). I am an expert enough user to KNOW that I saved them and that I DID NOT (knowingly) type in a read-only document.

I'm furious, stressed, demoralized, you name it right now and I would be ever so grateful for some expertise (preferably accompanied by references that I can site) with which to present a reasonably coherent argument regarding system maintenance.

Thanks in advance for any insights/suggestions you might have.

Shihlhasa

 

I don't think defragging the workstation's hard drive is likely to have much impact on the problems you describe. I'd be looking elsewhere for solutions to those problems, especially if the documents being created are stored on network drives rather than workstation drives. File fragmentation will slow a drive down somewhat if the fragmentation is extensive, but it doesn't cause data loss or corruption in the absence of other problems.

If the workstation drive is not used for storage of documents created on the workstation, defragging is not often needed. Application software doesn't get fragmented unless it's being re-written to the drive. That generally happens only to configuration files.

The file server would benefit from defragging much more frequently. The files on it are constantly being re-written.

Most defraggers offer an analysis option, i.e., they will report how much file fragmentation is on the drive so that you can decide whether it's worth the wear and tear on the drive to do the defrag. Run the analysis. It might give you the ammunition you're looking for -- or convince you that you're barking up the wrong tree. And you'll have some facts to work with. The references you were asking for will give you nothing better than expert opinions, probably conflicting, and often based on unstated assumptions that may or may not be appropriate to your particular situation.

And I'm surprised at one item you mention. You say 1000 documents per week are being created on that LAN. That's 200 per day, assuming a 5-day work week. I'd have expected nightly backups with that much stuff being created. Think of it this way: if the backup is done Wednesday night, and the server crashes a half-hour before on the Wednesday evening, you'll lose nearly all of those 1000 documents created since the last backup. Not smart, in my opinion.

Until your systems people figure out what's going on, you might want to save your files to your local hard drive as well as to the server. It's a pain, and can cause problems trying to figure out which copy is current after you've done some editing -- but it might be better than losing work the way you've described.

 

You can try some recovery software like Undelete to get back your files. However, if that area of the disk has been overwritten, you may be pretty much out of luck.

If your workstation and servers see heavy disk I/O and file creation/movement, then it would be a good idea to defrag them atleast once in a while. At the computing labs in my department, they use Diskeeper Pro on the workstations, and Diskeeper Server on the servers. IIRC, the workstation defragmentation operations are managed by the systems admin using DK administrator. It works great...no complaints of fragmentation related slowdowns or poor performance. (Incidentally, as mentioned in another thread, I also use diskeeper pro at home, but I have no need for the Administrator version since I have no server.)

But, as Rob M. suggested, backup, backup, backup, even if you have to do it yourself using your own hardware, if your data is of any value to you. Don't depend on others to safeguard your data even if it is their job to do so.

 

While it's a little off-topic, Deckard makes a really good point. The person who has the strongest interest in protecting your interests is you. Relying on others to look after your interests is a recipe for disappointment. Or worse.

 

Thanks much for the feedback - you've been a great help as always!

I hear what you're saying about saving my own work and will be more diligent about that in future.

I also hope I didn't scare anyone off with my request for references that I can cite - I work in admin in a medical facility and "expert opinion" carries a lot of weight (for better or worse, lol!)

Thanks again,
Shihlhasa

 

Speaking for myself....

You didn't scare me off. Not at all. My daytime job is with a regulatory agency -- regulators must always be able to point to the source of their authority in the the statutes that give them their authority. Pretty much the same thing.

Not everybody appreciates that there are expert opinions (which probably means something useful), lay opinions (what the man on the street thinks, which might or might not be close to the truth), and outright speculation. Which would you prefer to rely on?

Of course, there is one small problem. Experts want to be paid for their expertise. That shouldn't be a surprise. It's their stock in trade, and they've spent years and a lot of effort developing that expertise.