Libraries and Favorites

On 8/5/16 11:52 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 03:42:59 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 8/4/16 3:52 PM, masonc wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2016 00:29:25 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:


20 partitions? What the heck?

Partitions are a good way of managing files. Fragmentation is
minimized and de-fragmentation simplified. The space situation is
quickly seen in Disk Management.

I have 15 partitions and about 20,000 directories (subs and subsubs
etc counted; backups not counted). (work of 95 years (:=))
A "card index" for this library might be helpful but I have no
idea how to create it in MSMin7 Libraries.


Anyway, regarding your question, what you see in a Library view are the
actual files, not some abstract representation of files. When you add,
delete, or rename, you're acting directly on your files. That's what makes
Libraries useful.

But one thing I do NOT want to do is ACT on my precious files.
Hands OFF !

Thanks for the information, however convoluted the facts.

masonc http://frontal-lobe.info

I'm with Ken and Char on partitioning for file management.

The only time I will partition for file management is when the computer
has just one hard drive installed. Then, I will create a "Data"
partition, in order to separate my data from installed programs and the OS.

I do virtually all of my file management via folders, not partitions.

My laptop has 2 drives, one is an SSD and the other a spinner, or 3 drives
if you count the permanently attached USB drive. The SSD holds the OS, the
spinner holds the data (via the very useful Libraries feature, not via
relocating any folders!), and the USB drive holds VM images.

Do you use the built in Documents, Videos, etc personal folders listed
in the Start Menu?

My desktop, on the other hand, has 17 drives installed. There's an SSD for
the OS, while the other 16 drives are spinners with a combined capacity of
40TB (36.3TB usable). As far as Windows knows, I have a single volume of
that size, since none of the underlying data drives have a drive letter.

That's far more drives than I'll ever need, even if I live to be 500! LOL

My brother-in-law, on the other hand, is a different story.

Is there a place on the web with a real good primer for newbies on how
to get all those drives recognized as a single drive? I might want to
talk my brother-in-law into doing this.

Also, how do you go about backing up all that data?


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 44.0
Thunderbird 38.0.1
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 12:30:10 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 8/5/16 11:52 AM, Char Jackson wrote:


My desktop, on the other hand, has 17 drives installed. There's an SSD for
the OS, while the other 16 drives are spinners with a combined capacity of
40TB (36.3TB usable). As far as Windows knows, I have a single volume of
that size, since none of the underlying data drives have a drive letter.

That's far more drives than I'll ever need, even if I live to be 500! LOL

My brother-in-law, on the other hand, is a different story.

Is there a place on the web with a real good primer for newbies on how
to get all those drives recognized as a single drive? I might want to
talk my brother-in-law into doing this.

Also, how do you go about backing up all that data?


He's working on backing it up now. He'll be finished when you're 500.
vbg

On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 10:17:34 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote:

Partitions are a good way of managing files. Fragmentation is
minimized and de-fragmentation simplified. The space situation is
quickly seen in Disk Management.


| I strongly disagree. I think many people overpartition
| because they use partitions as an organizational structure.

I've been doing it since Win98. I have two disks
with redundant partitions. Anything I save gets copied
to both. If a hard disk dies suddenly I have backup.
Ditto for the OSs. One partition os for periodic backup:
Work files, personal records, email, etc. Others are
for more general data. The system works very well
for me.

I'd never store data only on an OS partition.
I think of it like an 18-wheeler. If the tractor dies you
don't want to be stuck on the highway with a trailer
full of perishable produce. The two should be separate,
like an 18-wheeler, so that you can easily hook up a
new tractor to the trailer and be on your way.

If you find that you're always trying to maximize
space then maybe you have too much stuff and
need to clean house. I have 2 500 GB disks and
don't come close to filling them. Maybe you have
lots of big photos and a movie library? In that case,
why not store most of that in multiple backups off
of the computer? If you have a disk of 200+ GB and
can't spare the room to partition then you have a
clutter problem. Or you might even consider deleting
some photos. That can take a lot of time, but
people who take a lot of photos tend to take *a lot*
that are not worth saving.

Good! Partitions Live! Hooray and Amen. [masonc]

On 8/5/16 2:54 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 12:30:10 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 8/5/16 11:52 AM, Char Jackson wrote:


My desktop, on the other hand, has 17 drives installed. There's an SSD for
the OS, while the other 16 drives are spinners with a combined capacity of
40TB (36.3TB usable). As far as Windows knows, I have a single volume of
that size, since none of the underlying data drives have a drive letter.

That's far more drives than I'll ever need, even if I live to be 500! LOL

My brother-in-law, on the other hand, is a different story.

Is there a place on the web with a real good primer for newbies on how
to get all those drives recognized as a single drive? I might want to
talk my brother-in-law into doing this.

Also, how do you go about backing up all that data?


He's working on backing it up now. He'll be finished when you're 500.
vbg

ROFL


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 44.0
Thunderbird 38.0.1
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

In message , Wolf K
writes:
On 2016-08-05 05:42, Ken Springer wrote:
[...]
I'm with Ken and Char on partitioning for file management.

So am I, but nowhere near as dogmatic. And ...

The only time I will partition for file management is when the computer
has just one hard drive installed. Then, I will create a "Data"
partition, in order to separate my data from installed programs and the OS.

+1

+another. In fact I would, I think, work that way even if the computer
_didn't_ have only one drive (though that's unlikely nowadays as I work
mostly with laptops, few of which have more than one). I's do it because
the _nature_ of the backups required is different: For the OS and
installed programmes, you _need_ an image (or clone) [along with - most
important! - and independently-bootable means of restoring from them];
just copying is no use. Data, on the other hand, _can_ safely just be
copied (though ideally using something like SyncToy to reduce the
_amount_ of copying required to ensure you have an identical backup);
this also has the advantage that the backup(s) can be accessed with
normal Windows Explorer should it be necessary (e. g. you've deleted and
overwritten an important file).

(Also, keeping the OS-and-software separate makes the size of what
should be imaged smaller [~35G in my case], which means you're likely to
actually do it more often.)

IMO very important for naive users who use the computer as an
appliance. Also recommend an external drive for backup.

Definitely. And that should be backup _only_ - disconnected when not
backing up. (Lest ransomware or other malware, or just accidents.)

Now, back to libraries: I think the fundamental problem is that MS
introduced something new, which some people obviously took to like a
duck to water; others, including me, assumed they were in effect some
variation on the concept of a shortcut/link, so assumed deleting
anything in a library didn't delete it from its real location. For me,
having to remember when doing so does and when it doesn't means I'm
unlikely to ever use them; not to say they shouldn't be used, or even
that they don't provide some useful new facility, just that I haven't
yet seen same explained in a way that makes the gain worth the effort
_for me_.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If mankind minus one were of one opinion, then mankind is no more justified in
silencing the one than the one - if he had the power - would be justified in
silencing mankind. -John Stuart Mill, philosopher and economist (1806-1873)

On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 12:30:10 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 8/5/16 11:52 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 03:42:59 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 8/4/16 3:52 PM, masonc wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2016 00:29:25 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:


20 partitions? What the heck?

Partitions are a good way of managing files. Fragmentation is
minimized and de-fragmentation simplified. The space situation is
quickly seen in Disk Management.

I have 15 partitions and about 20,000 directories (subs and subsubs
etc counted; backups not counted). (work of 95 years (:=))
A "card index" for this library might be helpful but I have no
idea how to create it in MSMin7 Libraries.


Anyway, regarding your question, what you see in a Library view are the
actual files, not some abstract representation of files. When you add,
delete, or rename, you're acting directly on your files. That's what makes
Libraries useful.

But one thing I do NOT want to do is ACT on my precious files.
Hands OFF !

Thanks for the information, however convoluted the facts.

masonc http://frontal-lobe.info

I'm with Ken and Char on partitioning for file management.

The only time I will partition for file management is when the computer
has just one hard drive installed. Then, I will create a "Data"
partition, in order to separate my data from installed programs and the OS.

I do virtually all of my file management via folders, not partitions.

My laptop has 2 drives, one is an SSD and the other a spinner, or 3 drives
if you count the permanently attached USB drive. The SSD holds the OS, the
spinner holds the data (via the very useful Libraries feature, not via
relocating any folders!), and the USB drive holds VM images.

Do you use the built in Documents, Videos, etc personal folders listed
in the Start Menu?

I use the Libraries entries for each of those, which transparently means I'm
reading/saving to the respective folders on D:. The corresponding folders
still exist on C:, so Windows doesn't freak out, but I don't use them.
Still, if a random file ends up on C:, I'll still see it and be able to
access it.

My desktop, on the other hand, has 17 drives installed. There's an SSD for
the OS, while the other 16 drives are spinners with a combined capacity of
40TB (36.3TB usable). As far as Windows knows, I have a single volume of
that size, since none of the underlying data drives have a drive letter.

That's far more drives than I'll ever need, even if I live to be 500! LOL

My brother-in-law, on the other hand, is a different story.

Is there a place on the web with a real good primer for newbies on how
to get all those drives recognized as a single drive? I might want to
talk my brother-in-law into doing this.

I use DriveBender, (Google knows where it is), but the generic term is
called drive pooling. Several versions of Windows Server have drive pooling
built in. I think they call it Drive Extender, but I don't use a Server
edition so I needed another solution.

I used to spend a lot of time moving files around from drive to drive in an
attempt to organize them, but with a 36TB 'drive', folders are allowed to
grow as needed. As a result, I just put files into folders without having to
deal with which physical drive actually holds them. It's pretty sweet. I
would not want to go back to multiple drives or multiple partitions.

Also, how do you go about backing up all that data?

The important stuff has two (or more) copies, but most of it isn't backed
up. It's mostly stuff that can be replaced or forgotten if it gets lost.

--

Char Jackson