Any advantage to using Erase.. vs Smart..?

[G.Wright]

I am assuming that after doing several incremental updates to my system and third-party software that the files needed for each application tend to get scattered around my hard drive.

I assume that doing multiple Smart Updates with SuperDuper! probably also fragments files that might better be kept together - yes? no?

Does SuperDuper! do any organization or optimization of files when making a clone?

Would making a clone using <Erase, Then Copy> have any advantage over <Smart Update> in preventing file fragmentation?

-gw

[dnanian]

Yes, a Smart Updated volume, like any active drive, will fragment. An erase-then-copy will defragment the files... but does it really matter?

[G.Wright]

Originally Posted by dnanian

Yes, a Smart Updated volume, like any active drive, will fragment. An erase-then-copy will defragment the files... but does it really matter?

I dunno - probably not.

I'm using Smart Update to clone Drive A to Drive B, then B back to A, A back to B, etc. My concern is this:
Is there any cumulative effect of updating a clone of an updated clone?

That is, would there be any practical advantage to periodically using Erase, Then Copy?

I acknowledge the answer to the following question may not have any real-world significance, but just to be sure I understand how this works:
Are you saying Erase, Then Clone actually defragments files, whatever the cause of that fragmentation may have been - as opposed to merely avoiding any fragmentation that may have resulted from doing a Smart Update?

[t3rockhall]

Originally Posted by G.Wright

I dunno - probably not.

I'm using Smart Update to clone Drive A to Drive B, then B back to A, A back to B, etc. My concern is this:
Is there any cumulative effect of updating a clone of an updated clone?

That is, would there be any practical advantage to periodically using Erase, Then Copy?

I do almost the same - A to B, B to C, C to B, and finally B to A, with no ill effects. Every few months, if I know I'll be away from the computer for a while, I'll do the B to A or the B to C as an erase and replace, only because it makes me feel good. I don't see any reason for doing an erase and replace on the backup drive, though.

So you understand WHY I do this, A is my main Mac, B is my external HD and C is my vacation home Mac.

YMMV.

[dnanian]

That's right: an erase then copy defragments the files (not the directory structure), regardless of how it got that way.