All Posts by Date or last 15, 30, 90 or 180 days.
also by Lloyd: photography and
Thank you for purchasing through links and ads on this site.
diglloyd Deal Finder...
Buy other stuff at
Upgrade the memory of your 2018 Mac mini up to 64GB
Handpicked deals...
$3698 $2998
SAVE $700

$2397 $1897
SAVE $500

$1199 $898
SAVE $301

$1299 $1169
SAVE $130

$4499 $3999
SAVE $500

$1399 $1099
SAVE $300

$1499 $1299
SAVE $200

$4499 $3149
SAVE $1350

$2299 $1599
SAVE $700

$2498 $2198
SAVE $300

$1799 $1379
SAVE $420

$2998 $2498
SAVE $500

$2199 $1999
SAVE $200

$430 $220
SAVE $210

$3399 $2299
SAVE $1100

$6299 $3599
SAVE $2700

$398 $278
SAVE $120

$1499 $1019
SAVE $480

$1279 $719
SAVE $560

$1699 $1549
SAVE $150

2018 MacBook Pro
$6299 $3599
15-inch 2.9 GHz Intel Core i9 6-core, 32GB, 4TB SSD, Radeon Pro 560X

Fantastic MBP at a great price!

Defrag or Upgrade to Faster/Larger? (Lightroom, Aperture, etc)

Harris W writes:

Thanks for all you do! Love my MPG Pro Workstation w/24 GB.

With my MPG I've been running for several years, Drive Genius 3 shows my Aperture Library has over 75K fragments (4TB Master is RAID-0 , 75% full).

Should I Defrag my Master? Can't seem to find much about Defrag for RAID/Aperture.

Aperture seems to run OK, just wondering if performance would improve/beneficial for program

Thank you - love all your research & info.

MPG: Defragmenting a volume might or might not help; it depends on the access patterns. And it takes time: how much will you save (net)?

General recommendation for Lightroom or Aperture

My general recommendation for Lightroom or Aperture or similar is to:

  • Store original large image files on a large volume such as a 4TB hard drive or similar (and/or a 2-drive RAID-0 stripe).
  • Place the catalog/library on a separate high performance PCIe SSD or similar.

That’s because catalog/library operations benefit hugely from an SSD, but the original images (particularly raw format images) are generally not involved in any way that impacts speed of operation.

Upgrading those drives — strong reasons


In this particular case, drives are notably faster today than in 2010.

More benefit would accrue by replacing the 3-year-old 2TB drives with a fresh pair of current fast 3TB hard drives or fast 4TB hard drives, which are up to 40% faster than the circa-2010 2TB drives for sequential transfer speed. That’s a big difference in responsiveness.

And the 3TB drives are not particularly expensive. While I prefer 4TB drives, it all depends on how much stuff you have to store. Ideally, aim for using only 50% of capacity to keep transfer rates at high speed.

Note well that drives slow down as they fill up, so Harris W is working off the slowest portion of the drives! See Why You Need More Space Than You You Need; Harris W is at present using a sort of anti-optimization. By upgrading to larger and faster drives, actual performance increases for sequential transfers might be on the order of 70% or so once the capacity usage influence is accounted for. Not all of that will translate to user experience; much of what Aperture or Lightroom do is CPU-limited.

Make a new RAID-0 stripe of a spiffy new pair of fast hard drives, then clone over the existing Master volume to it.

Don’t take risks here— see How to Safely Transfer Data or Verify Backups and the related discussion.

Finally, I get nervous about having my data on 3-year-old hard drives in any case, depending on usage time. Turn those existing drives into external backups.

Fast 3TB hard drive as it fills up its entire capacity ( DiskTester fill-volume)

Save the tax, we pay you back, instantly!
View all handpicked deals...

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR Lens
$2397 $1897
SAVE $500 | Terms of Use | PRIVACY POLICY
Contact | About Lloyd Chambers | Consulting | Photo Tours
Mailing Lists | RSS Feeds | Twitter
Copyright © 2019 diglloyd Inc, all rights reserved.
Display info: __RETINA_INFO_STATUS__