Hard Drive Partitioning

Well it does reduce the time for a CHKDSK to complete. :-)

wrote:

Hi Jay,

Partitioning is total waste of time and provides no additional data
security. If you want an optimized swap file then set the minimum and
maximum size to be identical -- this will prevent fragmentation. Want
to store music and photos in their own area? Create a folder.

If you want to seperate personal data from the system data then
consider moving all personal data into the MyDocuments folder -- you
can use TweakUI to move the Favorites and Desktop folders. Make sure to
also relocate your email and address book data. (I also like to move
"MyDocuments" to "c:\data" to make it all more accessible. With all
critical personal data thus centralized in a single folder, it's easy
to use freeware backup software to keep a running backup on your second
drive (not a second partition on the same drive).

Here's a collection of freeware data backup tools which you might find
useful for this:

http://free-backup.info/backup-software.htm

And a link to TweakUI:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/d...powertoys.mspx

Regards,
Chad

Peter wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Peter wrote

What you can do to avoid this is to ghost your system periodically
and store that on your second drive also. That way you have daily
backups of critical personal data and periodic (say monthly)
ghosted system backup. That would be the best of both worlds
because you can then completely recover from a total main disk
failure in a matter of minutes.

There is an issue though, if OS + applications + critical
data take only 10GB but non critical data 150GB.

You're mangling the story considerably. There is no point in having
critical data in with the OS and apps, the OS and apps dont change
much over time and so dont need a high backup frequency.

I'm not saying that I have "critical data in with the OS and apps".
I have said that "OS + applications + critical data take only 10GB".
It does not imply that they are in the same partition.

OK, but its still not relevant to include the OS and apps
in with the critical data volume wise, the space taken by
the OS and apps is irrelevant to the backup question.

And he doesnt have a volume problem anyway
with the second 160G drive so cheap.

But they might be left in the same partition, why not.

Basically its too risky to try to include just the critical data in
with the OS and apps, much safer to backup the data when
it changes and not attempt to work out what is critical data.

Or more strictly it makes a lot of sense backup all the
data you create yourself that way and say the stuff
you save off the net etc as less important to backup.

While apps may not change much over time, OS is
a different story. Any updates, fixes or damages
from virus, spyware and alike can happen any time.

That's rather mangled too. The changes to the OS and apps due
to updates and fixes cant happen at any time unless you choose
to have automatic updates. So you only need to backup the OS
and apps partition whenever updates and fixes have been done.

Yes, like I said, you can make a case for having a separate
OS and apps partition to maximise the chance that you will
bother to back it up after each update or fix, but even thats
arguable if its an automated incremental backup that happens
when you arent around.

I treat my OS configuration almost as vital as critical data.

Thats mad. Critical irreplaceable data is completely different. The
worst that can happen with the OS and apps is that you need to do
a clean install and then update that if the worst comes to the worst.

I don't have time to reistall everything (OS + apps + settings)
when something goes wrong. I want to restore it.

Sure, but that doesnt mean that is almost as vital as irreplaceable
data. Its a convenience thing rather than an impossibility.

That is why I put it together with critical
data. Those things need to be saved often.

No they dont, they only need to be resaved when they have changed.

Non critical data are mostly downloads or streaming
data being worked on. Originals are always archived.

CWatters wrote
wrote

I still don't see any benefit -- even with apps. If you have
to re-install, the registry will be wiped clean meaning that
almost all apps will need to be re-installed anyway.

That's one thing I wish MS could/would fix. It would
be nice to be able to reinstall an os without having
to do the same for all the other progs.

You can, that's what the install in place does, doesnt affect the apps at all.

Usually used when you move a hard drive to a completely
different system, or the equivalent using an image file etc.

"Peter" wrote in message
.. .
And what about the benefit of having your data on a partition separate
from the system and apps?

That way, if you need to reinstall Windows or whatever, your data
partition need not be affected.

Makes sense to me.

That implies that there was no backup of data.

No it does not imply that

--
Joep

Just give windows plenty of space for both the OS and any applications. How
much depends on what and how many applications you intend to load. The
partition should also have freespace for "breathing room"

Frontloading the swapfile on a first partition of a just as fast or faster
hard drive is acceptable. Just let windows decide the swapfile size. Am
using a 4GB partition for that here.

You can divide your data between folders on one partition, or partitions on
a separate hard drive. Makes little difference.

Stick with NTFS.

"JayD" wrote in message
oups.com...
I just purchased a new computer running XP that came with a 160GB HD,
and picked up a 2nd
160GB HD as it was only $39 (after rebates).
I have a few questions re partitioning -
I plan on dividing the second HD into seperate partitions for
Data/Downloads/Photos/Music/.
I was also thinking of making a small partition at the beginning of the
drive to use for swap/paging.

Is it best to leave the primary drive intact, or make a seperate
partition for the OS, so if/when I need to do any maintenance, I only
need to deal with a 10GB drive.
Does it make sense to have a seperate drive for programs (install to
D:/program files instead of
C:/program files)?

Thanks,
Jay D

What you can do to avoid this is to ghost your system periodically
and store that on your second drive also. That way you have daily
backups of critical personal data and periodic (say monthly)
ghosted system backup. That would be the best of both worlds
because you can then completely recover from a total main disk
failure in a matter of minutes.

There is an issue though, if OS + applications + critical
data take only 10GB but non critical data 150GB.

You're mangling the story considerably. There is no point in having
critical data in with the OS and apps, the OS and apps dont change
much over time and so dont need a high backup frequency.

I'm not saying that I have "critical data in with the OS and apps".
I have said that "OS + applications + critical data take only 10GB".
It does not imply that they are in the same partition.

OK, but its still not relevant to include the OS and apps
in with the critical data volume wise, the space taken by
the OS and apps is irrelevant to the backup question.

It is relevant because I backup OS and aplications too.

And he doesnt have a volume problem anyway
with the second 160G drive so cheap.

He didn't say that he has a volume problem. He had question on how/if to
partition drive.

But they might be left in the same partition, why not.

Basically its too risky to try to include just the critical data in
with the OS and apps,

It is not risky if properly backed up.

much safer to backup the data when
it changes and not attempt to work out what is critical data.

I grade my data (frequent backup set, seldom archive set, no backup or
archive set), because backing all frequently would take too much resources.

Or more strictly it makes a lot of sense backup all the
data you create yourself that way and say the stuff
you save off the net etc as less important to backup.

That is what I'm saying.

While apps may not change much over time, OS is
a different story. Any updates, fixes or damages
from virus, spyware and alike can happen any time.

That's rather mangled too. The changes to the OS and apps due
to updates and fixes cant happen at any time unless you choose
to have automatic updates. So you only need to backup the OS
and apps partition whenever updates and fixes have been done.

I do chose to have automated updates. OS, antivirus, antispyware, etc. Is
that still "mangled" ?

Yes, like I said, you can make a case for having a separate
OS and apps partition to maximise the chance that you will
bother to back it up after each update or fix, but even thats
arguable if its an automated incremental backup that happens
when you arent around.

Too many problems with incremental backups. At least as of today.

I treat my OS configuration almost as vital as critical data.
Thats mad. Critical irreplaceable data is completely different. The
worst that can happen with the OS and apps is that you need to do
a clean install and then update that if the worst comes to the worst.

I said almost. I don't have irreplacable critical data which loss would cost
me thousand dollars. But others might.

I don't have time to reistall everything (OS + apps + settings)
when something goes wrong. I want to restore it.

Sure, but that doesnt mean that is almost as vital as irreplaceable
data. Its a convenience thing rather than an impossibility.

Right. Depends on personal situation.

That is why I put it together with critical
data. Those things need to be saved often.

No they dont, they only need to be resaved when they have changed.

You might call it "resaved". I never thought that way (backup as a
"resaver").

Non critical data are mostly downloads or streaming
data being worked on. Originals are always archived.

No comment here?

"Lil' Dave" wrote:
[.........]
Frontloading the swapfile on a first partition of a
just as fast or faster hard drive is acceptable....


Is this because the partition numbering starts
with the outside cylinders (which contain the
fastest moving tracks)?

*TimDaniels*

Peter wrote

What you can do to avoid this is to ghost your system
periodically and store that on your second drive also. That way
you have daily backups of critical personal data and periodic
(say monthly) ghosted system backup. That would be the best of
both worlds because you can then completely recover from a total
main disk failure in a matter of minutes.

There is an issue though, if OS + applications + critical
data take only 10GB but non critical data 150GB.

You're mangling the story considerably. There is no point in having
critical data in with the OS and apps, the OS and apps dont change
much over time and so dont need a high backup frequency.

I'm not saying that I have "critical data in with the OS and apps".
I have said that "OS + applications + critical data take only 10GB".
It does not imply that they are in the same partition.

OK, but its still not relevant to include the OS and apps
in with the critical data volume wise, the space taken by
the OS and apps is irrelevant to the backup question.

It is relevant because I backup OS and aplications too.

Nope. In spades with him because he
has loads of space to put backups into.

And he doesnt have a volume problem anyway
with the second 160G drive so cheap.

He didn't say that he has a volume problem.

He doesnt have a volume problem, he has
loads of space on the second 160G drive.

He had question on how/if to partition drive.

And you started discussing backup,
and I commented on what you said.

But they might be left in the same partition, why not.

Basically its too risky to try to include just
the critical data in with the OS and apps,

It is not risky if properly backed up.

Its risky trying to decide what is critical data and what
is not, because what is critical data may not get backed
up with the other critical data. THATS the risk.

much safer to backup the data when it changes
and not attempt to work out what is critical data.

I grade my data (frequent backup set, seldom
archive set, no backup or archive set),

And that is a risky approach, it isnt hard to forget about some
critical data and not include it in the frequent backup set.

because backing all frequently would take too much resources.

I never said that it should be backed up frequently, I clearly
said that its a lot safer to back up what changes instead.

Or more strictly it makes a lot of sense backup all the
data you create yourself that way and say the stuff
you save off the net etc as less important to backup.

That is what I'm saying.

But it isnt always easy to decide what you have created yourself
with stuff like digital certificates etc with that level of user.

While apps may not change much over time, OS
is a different story. Any updates, fixes or damages
from virus, spyware and alike can happen any time.

That's rather mangled too. The changes to the OS and apps due
to updates and fixes cant happen at any time unless you choose
to have automatic updates. So you only need to backup the OS
and apps partition whenever updates and fixes have been done.

I do chose to have automated updates. OS,
antivirus, antispyware, etc. Is that still "mangled" ?

Yes, because you didnt make it clear that that you were
talking about that approach, and that it isnt necessarily
the best approach if you arent using automated updates.

Yes, like I said, you can make a case for having a separate
OS and apps partition to maximise the chance that you will
bother to back it up after each update or fix, but even thats
arguable if its an automated incremental backup that happens
when you arent around.

Too many problems with incremental backups. At least as of today.

Bull****. In spades with automated incremental backups
that get done when the system isnt being used.

I treat my OS configuration almost as vital as critical data.

Thats mad. Critical irreplaceable data is completely different. The
worst that can happen with the OS and apps is that you need to do
a clean install and then update that if the worst comes to the worst.

I said almost.

Nothing like almost.

I don't have irreplacable critical data which loss
would cost me thousand dollars. But others might.

Most do have data that would cost them more effort than
a clean install and updates applied in the worst case where
a virus etc does happen to infect the system since the last
OS and apps backup where there has been significant
reconfig since then that has not been backed up.

And that is easily avoided by doing another backup whenever
there has been a significant reconfig or update etc done.

I don't have time to reistall everything (OS + apps + settings)
when something goes wrong. I want to restore it.

Sure, but that doesnt mean that is almost as vital as irreplaceable
data. Its a convenience thing rather than an impossibility.

Right. Depends on personal situation.

Its hardly ever almost as vital when the OS
and apps are backed up, just not daily etc.

That is why I put it together with critical
data. Those things need to be saved often.

No they dont, they only need to be resaved when they have changed.

You might call it "resaved". I never thought
that way (backup as a "resaver").

Corse it is.

Non critical data are mostly downloads or streaming
data being worked on. Originals are always archived.

No comment here?

I did, you deleted it from the quoting.

Lil' Dave wrote:

Just give windows plenty of space for both the OS and any
applications. How much depends on what and how many
applications you intend to load. The partition should also
have freespace for "breathing room"

Frontloading the swapfile on a first partition of a just as fast
or faster hard drive is acceptable. Just let windows decide
the swapfile size. Am using a 4GB partition for that here.

You can divide your data between folders on one partition, or
partitions on a separate hard drive. Makes little difference.

Makes quite a bit of difference, actually. With separate partitions
for different types of data make it very hard to decide what is the
appropriate size for each of them, particularly over time, and the
free space gets split over the partitions. And its risky to change
partition sizes without full backup of the data in them. Doesnt
happen with a single data partition using folder trees.

Stick with NTFS.


"JayD" wrote in message
oups.com...
I just purchased a new computer running XP that came with a 160GB HD,
and picked up a 2nd
160GB HD as it was only $39 (after rebates).
I have a few questions re partitioning -
I plan on dividing the second HD into seperate partitions for
Data/Downloads/Photos/Music/.
I was also thinking of making a small partition at the beginning of
the drive to use for swap/paging.

Is it best to leave the primary drive intact, or make a seperate
partition for the OS, so if/when I need to do any maintenance, I only
need to deal with a 10GB drive.
Does it make sense to have a seperate drive for programs (install to
D:/program files instead of
C:/program files)?

Thanks,
Jay D

JayD wrote:
I just purchased a new computer running XP that came with a 160GB HD,
and picked up a 2nd
160GB HD as it was only $39 (after rebates).
I have a few questions re partitioning -
I plan on dividing the second HD into seperate partitions for
Data/Downloads/Photos/Music/.
I was also thinking of making a small partition at the beginning of the
drive to use for swap/paging.

Good idea to keep paging on the second drive but not at the beginning.


Is it best to leave the primary drive intact, or make a seperate
partition for the OS, so if/when I need to do any maintenance, I only
need to deal with a 10GB drive.

A separate partition for OS and applications makes sense. I would
mirror this on the second drive, and keep copy of your data partitions
on drive 1.

In essence, both drives have the same structure, with an OS + apps
partition at the beginning, then a swap/paging partition followed by
one or more data only partitions.

Does it make sense to have a seperate drive for programs (install to
D:/program files instead of
C:/program files)?

I would say no, but if you browse the Web a lot moving temporary
internet files on drive 2 could be helpful. Just try, you can always
move them back.

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Odie Ferrous wrote:
wrote:

Hi Jay,

Partitioning is total waste of time and provides no additional data
security.

And what about the benefit of having your data on a partition separate
from the system and apps?

That way, if you need to reinstall Windows or whatever, your data
partition need not be affected.

Makes sense to me.

I have used that setting with good success for years. Mostly for
games (since I do other stuff on Linux) and except for a few really
stupidly designed ones that put their savegames on the c:/ drive
instead of into the installation directories, no serious problems
so far. You might loose the entries in the start menu on
reinstallation of windows from scratch or backup, but the apps
should still run as intended.

Arno

Nice hearing from you.
Its first accessed there.
Think I'll scoot along now. You know who is tootin' his horn again.

"Timothy Daniels" wrote in message
...
"Lil' Dave" wrote:
[.........]
Frontloading the swapfile on a first partition of a
just as fast or faster hard drive is acceptable....


Is this because the partition numbering starts
with the outside cylinders (which contain the
fastest moving tracks)?

*TimDaniels*

"Peter" wrote in message
.. .

So if you have a backup of a data volume, why do you care if data
partition
is affected or not?

Because you can't have too many copies, and the HDD is more reliable than
most backup media.


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add
2 more zeros and remove the obvious.

So if you have a backup of a data volume, why do you care if data
partition
is affected or not?

Because you can't have too many copies, and the HDD is more reliable than
most backup media.

That's right. Backup usually is a first copy of data. And it needs to be
verified to be sure it can be reliably read back.
Too many copies?
Yes, HDDs are often more reliable than most backup media. So what? They tend
to fail from time to time. And HDDs can be used as a backup media too.

Hi,

Lost data can be recovered with Active@ Undelete tool. It has grand
restore methods, you should really experience it's power yourself!
http://www.active-undelete.com/