Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk without disturbing the data that is in t

Discussion in 'Windows XP General' started by JoeSulla, May 5, 2012.

  1. JoeSulla

    JoeSulla Guest

    When I run the Dell Diagnostics on my system disk I get a Read Test Error
    code 0F00:0244

    Is that reasom enough to move the system off that disk?

    My system disk is 35G and has two prinary partitions - Dell Diagnostics and
    XP

    I have another disk, 500g, paritioned in to three partitions: a primary and
    two logicals.

    If it makes sense to make the bigger disk the system disk consider:

    The primary has no data that I want. I need the data in the other two big
    partitions.

    Reading the Acronis manual it appears that cloning the system disk onto the
    other one will erasse all my data in the two logical partitions.

    Is that correct?

    Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk without
    disturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions?


    Thank
     
    JoeSulla, May 5, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. JoeSulla

    Paul Guest

    Re: Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk withoutdisturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions

    JoeSulla wrote:
    > When I run the Dell Diagnostics on my system disk I get a Read Test Error
    > code 0F00:0244
    >
    > Is that reasom enough to move the system off that disk?
    >
    > My system disk is 35G and has two prinary partitions - Dell Diagnostics and
    > XP
    >
    > I have another disk, 500g, paritioned in to three partitions: a primary and
    > two logicals.
    >
    > If it makes sense to make the bigger disk the system disk consider:
    >
    > The primary has no data that I want. I need the data in the other two big
    > partitions.
    >
    > Reading the Acronis manual it appears that cloning the system disk onto the
    > other one will erasse all my data in the two logical partitions.
    >
    > Is that correct?
    >
    > Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk without
    > disturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions?
    >
    >
    > Thank


    My first question would be, how trustworthy is the Dell Diagnostic ?
    I tried a search, and wasn't able to form a strong opinion, based
    on what people were doing with the results.

    Generally, you'd want to test with a second diagnostic, and see if it
    reports problems in the same block.

    Both Western Digital and Seagate, offer diagnostics for download from
    their web site. Seagate makes a self-booting version (Seatools for DOS)
    and a version that runs from Windows, as examples of diagnostics. They
    can have things like a "short" and a "long" test. Such tests would
    likely include read verification.

    A lot of other disk companies, have been bought up by the big two,
    making it more of a challenge to find the diagnostics for other
    brands of disks.

    I can get the same sort of info as well, from some testing with
    HDTune, but that probably won't be giving you a log to look at
    later.

    *******

    You'll need a Partition Manager program, to do manipulations on
    the disk partitions. For example, you could "move" the logicals to
    the left, squeeze down the extended partition holding them, and put
    new partitions to the right. Or, attempt to convert the logicals
    into primary partitions. Or, try the (much more dangerous) merge
    type operation, to squash them together and make room for more
    partitions.

    Depending on the importance of your data though, I still like the idea
    of backing up a disk, as a function of what you plan to do to it. If
    I was "merging" several partitions, I'd definitely make an image of
    the entire disk, onto a brand new disk.

    Think of it this way. You've had a disk failure, and are now "minus one disk".
    Logically, you should be buying a new (dependable) disk to add to your
    collection, to take its place. That gives you one spare disk to play with,
    while planning all your partition movements or changes. You can select
    a size of disk, big enough to do maintenance on the biggest disk you've
    got. The pricing on disks is sufficiently illogical, you can pay just
    about anything now, whether the disk is 20GB or 2TB.

    There are partition manager programs which are available for free.
    There are Linux discs like Gparted LiveCD (which I find scary, because
    of the bogus messages you might see while it's running). If selecting
    a free partition manager, run the name of the utility through Google,
    and see if it's damaged stuff. if there are reports of it ruining disks,
    then you'll have advanced warning (and be using that new disk for a backup).

    Even Windows has some primitive capabilities. DiskPart, if you run it
    from a Windows 7 Recovery Console, can do things like "shrink" a partition.
    You can download a Windows 7 installer DVD, and use the Recovery Console on
    it, without a license key.

    But what most people are looking for, is a reliable "non-circus" tool
    that won't make them crazy. In which case, a commercial partition manager,
    with a good reputation, is what you should be looking for. I revel in
    the free crap, but also use backups to cover me, in case something goes
    wrong. And with that "new disk to replace old disk, balance of the universe"
    approach I suggest, you should be getting an additional brand new disk, so
    you don't have to be nearly as fearful while making these changes.
    I don't mind moving a primary partition with a utility. That always
    works. But some of the more complicated operations, like "merge", is
    just asking for trouble.

    I wouldn't have made those two logicals in the first place. That
    would put me in a hard spot, when it comes to managing space, and facing
    the situation you're in right now. From bitter experience, I know if
    I make logicals now, they'll only be a roadblock later, to easy solutions.
    Sometimes you have no choice. In the old days, I had particular reasons
    for having a computer with 20 partitions. But I just don't do stuff like
    that any more. A lot of the old capacity barriers that caused solutions
    like that, are gone.

    *******

    One other thing. I'm sure Acronis will be able to find how many partitions
    are really on that disk. A Dell might have three or four. You can use
    PTEDIT32, to check the partition types, if you want another opinion.

    ftp://ftp.symantec.com/public/english_us_canada/tools/pq/utilities/PTEDIT32.zip

    Example output from that program, showing a Dell disk.

    http://www.goodells.net/dellrestore/files/dell-tbl.gif

    *******

    In your situation, I'd probably be dropping by my local supplier,
    and picking up another disk. On average, I buy about two disks a
    year, just so I have a safe place to do stuff. That's better than
    plotting and scheming, with untested partition manager utilities,
    when you have no safety net to work with.

    Paul
     
    Paul, May 5, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. From: "Paul" <>

    > JoeSulla wrote:
    >> When I run the Dell Diagnostics on my system disk I get a Read Test Error
    >> code 0F00:0244
    >>
    >> Is that reasom enough to move the system off that disk?
    >>
    >> My system disk is 35G and has two prinary partitions - Dell Diagnostics and
    >> XP
    >>
    >> I have another disk, 500g, paritioned in to three partitions: a primary and
    >> two logicals.
    >>
    >> If it makes sense to make the bigger disk the system disk consider:
    >>
    >> The primary has no data that I want. I need the data in the other two big
    >> partitions.
    >>
    >> Reading the Acronis manual it appears that cloning the system disk onto the
    >> other one will erasse all my data in the two logical partitions.
    >>
    >> Is that correct?
    >>
    >> Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk without
    >> disturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions?
    >>
    >>
    >> Thank

    >
    > My first question would be, how trustworthy is the Dell Diagnostic ?
    > I tried a search, and wasn't able to form a strong opinion, based
    > on what people were doing with the results.
    >


    It's trustworthy albeit I prefer manufacturer diagnostics but I haven't had a case where
    the two software disagree.



    --
    Dave
    Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk
    http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp
     
    David H. Lipman, May 5, 2012
    #3
  4. JoeSulla

    Char Jackson Guest

    On Fri, 4 May 2012 19:59:36 -0400, "JoeSulla"
    <> wrote:

    >When I run the Dell Diagnostics on my system disk I get a Read Test Error
    >code 0F00:0244
    >
    >Is that reasom enough to move the system off that disk?


    By itself, probably not, but you can get a second or third opinion by
    running chkdsk and/or the drive fitness utility for your respective
    drive.

    >My system disk is 35G and has two prinary partitions - Dell Diagnostics and
    >XP
    >
    >I have another disk, 500g, paritioned in to three partitions: a primary and
    >two logicals.
    >
    >If it makes sense to make the bigger disk the system disk consider:
    >
    >The primary has no data that I want. I need the data in the other two big
    >partitions.
    >
    >Reading the Acronis manual it appears that cloning the system disk onto the
    >other one will erasse all my data in the two logical partitions.
    >
    >Is that correct?


    That's correct. If you use the Clone feature, everything currently on
    the target drive will be gone. The solution is simple: don't use the
    Clone feature since it doesn't apply in your case.

    >Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk without
    >disturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions?


    You need a tool that can copy partitions from drive to drive and
    optionally adjust the size and placement of those partitions on the
    target drive.

    I use Acronis Disk Director since it's what I have on hand. I've used
    it numerous times to copy or move partitions, among many other
    partition-related tasks, and it works well. I'm sure you can find a
    similar tool, maybe even freeware, that will copy an existing
    partition from one drive to a second drive. Copy the two partitions to
    the big drive, make that drive bootable, and Bob's your uncle.
     
    Char Jackson, May 5, 2012
    #4
  5. JoeSulla

    Paul Guest

    Re: Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk withoutdisturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions

    Molly Gilliver wrote:
    > In message <jo1thu$6nm$>, Paul <> writes
    > []
    >> I wouldn't have made those two logicals in the first place. That
    >> would put me in a hard spot, when it comes to managing space, and facing
    >> the situation you're in right now. From bitter experience, I know if
    >> I make logicals now, they'll only be a roadblock later, to easy
    >> solutions.

    >
    > Care to elaborate on that? Although I only have two partitions (one for
    > the OS and software, the other for my data) on this my main machine, I'm
    > curious to know your reasons for disliking multiple partitions.


    When you need to move logicals, it isn't very convenient. Your best choice,
    might be to make the fourth partition the extended one, and put the logicals in
    there. But during your planning phase, you'd better get the sizes right,
    or you're in for hours of fun. For example, if you needed to make your
    third primary larger, you might need to shrink your logicals, shift them
    to the right, shrink the Extended and move its left edge to the right,
    until you have an unallocated gap suitable for making the third primary
    partition larger. Which is a whole lot of work, with a whole lot of risk.

    >
    >> Sometimes you have no choice. In the old days, I had particular reasons
    >> for having a computer with 20 partitions. But I just don't do stuff like
    >> that any more. A lot of the old capacity barriers that caused solutions
    >> like that, are gone.

    >
    > I agree the reasons you _had_ to have many partitions are mostly gone
    > (mainly OS and/or motherboard limitations), but I think some people just
    > like it as something logical. (Also, possibly, having one for large
    > and/or fast-access files - such as video files - might still have
    > advantages in some situations, though a physically separate disc would
    > be better for most of those.)
    > []


    I had a certain backup tool, with size limits on backup. And the "20 partition"
    machine, allowed me to beat their silly limit, which had no logical reasoning
    in the first place. It was just an arbitrary limit in some commercial backup
    software I'd bought. Rather than let the bastards win, I "fixed it". And at
    the time, 20 partitions was the max allowed. I would have continued with the
    silly idea, and added more partitions, if I could have.

    >> ftp://ftp.symantec.com/public/english_us_canada/tools/pq/utilities/PTEDIT32.zip
    >>
    >>
    >> Example output from that program, showing a Dell disk.
    >>
    >> http://www.goodells.net/dellrestore/files/dell-tbl.gif

    > []
    > That puzzles me. It seems to show a disc with three partitions (well,
    > four, but the fourth one is all zeros - I presume that's its way of
    > marking the end of the list). But although the first three have
    > different "Starting" "Cyl Head Sector" numbers, they all seem to have
    > the same "Ending" ones. I'd have expected each one to end at the sector
    > before the next one starts?!?
    >
    > (I also see partition 1 starts at Cyl 0 Head 1 Sector 1, and has 63
    > sectors before it, whereas the others all start on a Head 0; I presume
    > the first head [0] of 63 sectors is where the partition table itself,
    > and/or boot sector, resides, or something like that?)


    Once you get past a certain capacity point, the CHS is bogus. Disks are
    actually controlled by LBA (logical block address), the numbers down
    the right hand side of the PTEDIT32 display. But the CHS is still used
    by a lot of OSes, for decision making. For example, Disk Management in
    WinXP, plans the offsets and sizes of partitions, quantized to "S". So
    if there are 63 sectors per track, then everything on the right hand
    side ends up divisible by 63. And that screws up two things. Efficient
    operations on an SSD. And efficient operations on a 4KB/sector current
    generation hard drive. If the number was 64, the "world would have been
    a happy place".

    At one time, disks had small capacities, and the CHS was physical. You
    might have had say eight heads, some number of fixed sectors per track,
    and the cylinder count was real. You would specify operations in terms
    of particular C, H, and S values. But once disks got large enough, the
    allocation for those fields (field width) ended up too small. So IDE drives
    and the BIOS, added support for simple logical block addressing, a single
    number specifying what sector you wanted. That's similar to how SCSI works,
    which had LBA from the start (a much more reasonable design, but
    with added complexity in the controller board strapped to the drive).

    Real disks, are actually variable geometry. The disk is "zoned", meaning
    the number of sectors per track, varies across the disk. To convert an
    LBA, into actual internal geometry on the disk, would need to take into
    consideration, how the zones work. A good drive design, numbers all the
    sectors as well, so after seek is complete, and the head is on track,
    the controller can read the sector headers, and verify its in the right
    place to get the LBA numbered sector the user specified. IBM is an example
    of a company, that stopped doing that (no double check via sector headers).

    *******

    That Dell disk has three primary partitions. It's possible PTEDIT32 also
    has a notation for logical, but since I just don't use extended/logical
    partitions here, I don't know what it does in that situation. Logicals
    live in an extended envelope, and so one primary partition would have
    a partition type field indicating extended. The GUI on that tool, doesn't
    look like it has room to display logicals at all. Just the primary partitions.

    PTEDIT32 and Partition Magic in general, are pretty "brittle" when it comes
    to "fake CHS geometry" info, alignment to multiples of S, and so on. If
    I were to present a Windows 7 disk, with alignment to 1MB chunks instead of
    to 63 sectors, the tools would likely error out. Whereas, when PTEDIT32 and
    the OS disagree on the fake CHS shorthand, you get warnings every time
    those tools are started. Annoying, but not the end of the world. The thing
    is, if you "let Partition Magic fix the problem", the problem only comes
    back again later, after you make some change with Disk Management.

    And if I switch over to one of the 500 Linux distros, in an attempt to do
    maintenance work, the tools there have switched to Windows 7 style alignment.
    Instead of providing "hobbyist style controls" that could do just
    about anything, they instead provided "dumbed down controls", which
    means I can't do any serious work with things like GParted, from Linux.

    Summary: Things are a mess... The switch from CHS, should have started
    a lot sooner. As in, completely ignoring CHS once the disks no longer
    used CHS in a practical way. And it's mainly an issue, if you're trying
    to maintain your older equipment.

    Paul
     
    Paul, May 5, 2012
    #5
  6. JoeSulla

    dadiOH Guest

    JoeSulla wrote:
    > When I run the Dell Diagnostics on my system disk I get a Read Test
    > Error code 0F00:0244
    >
    > Is that reasom enough to move the system off that disk?
    >
    > My system disk is 35G and has two prinary partitions - Dell
    > Diagnostics and XP
    >
    > I have another disk, 500g, paritioned in to three partitions: a
    > primary and two logicals.
    >
    > If it makes sense to make the bigger disk the system disk consider:
    >
    > The primary has no data that I want. I need the data in the other two
    > big partitions.
    >
    > Reading the Acronis manual it appears that cloning the system disk
    > onto the other one will erasse all my data in the two logical
    > partitions.
    > Is that correct?
    >
    > Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk without
    > disturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions?


    Sure...

    1. Install XP to the primary partition of the bigger drive. Doing so won't
    mess up anything already in that partition or the other two. If you have
    programs installed on the smaller drive, one of three things will happen
    when you run them from the new XP install...

    a) they will run just fine despite the lack of registry entries
    b) they will make new entries in the new XP registry
    c) they won't run and will have to be re-installed

    Most all will be either "a" or "b". You may have to re-enter any
    registration number for them.

    2. You now have a system which can boot from either drive. You will be
    presented with a boot menu when you boot so you can choose the drive; one of
    the XP installs (the older most likely) will be the default. The boot menu
    comes from boot.ini which is a text file on the first primary drive (what is
    now C:)

    3. Once you have things as you want them, you can just delete the original
    XP install (the Windows directory).. You can also edit boot.ini so that
    only the remaining XP install is listed; you can also edit the time delay
    ("timeout") for choosing a boot drive so that there is no delay.

    Note that this would place Windows on whatever the drive letter is for the
    new XP install (it won't be C:). That is no problem, just leave it as it is
    and forget having C: as the boot drive.

    I'm sure there are other ways to do what you want too but this requires
    nothing you don't already have (I assume you have an XP install disk).

    --

    dadiOH
    ____________________________

    dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
    ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
    LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
    Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
     
    dadiOH, May 5, 2012
    #6
  7. On Sat, 5 May 2012 12:09:24 +0100, Molly Gilliver
    <> wrote:

    > In message <jo1thu$6nm$>, Paul <> writes
    > []
    > >I wouldn't have made those two logicals in the first place. That
    > >would put me in a hard spot, when it comes to managing space, and facing
    > >the situation you're in right now. From bitter experience, I know if
    > >I make logicals now, they'll only be a roadblock later, to easy solutions.

    >
    > Care to elaborate on that? Although I only have two partitions (one for
    > the OS and software, the other for my data) on this my main machine, I'm
    > curious to know your reasons for disliking multiple partitions.



    I'm not Paul, to whom you responded, but I am also someone who
    generally dislikes multiple partitions and recommends against them for
    most people. If you're curious you can read my reasons in this article
    I've written: "Understanding Disk Partitioning" at
    http://www.computorcompanion.com/LPMArticle.asp?ID=326

    Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP
     
    Ken Blake, MVP, May 5, 2012
    #7
  8. On Sat, 5 May 2012 11:04:09 -0400, "David H. Lipman"
    <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:

    > From: "Ken Blake, MVP" <>
    >
    > > On Sat, 5 May 2012 12:09:24 +0100, Molly Gilliver
    > > <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> In message <jo1thu$6nm$>, Paul <> writes
    > >> []
    > >>> I wouldn't have made those two logicals in the first place. That
    > >>> would put me in a hard spot, when it comes to managing space, and facing
    > >>> the situation you're in right now. From bitter experience, I know if
    > >>> I make logicals now, they'll only be a roadblock later, to easy
    > >>> solutions.
    > >>
    > >> Care to elaborate on that? Although I only have two partitions (one for
    > >> the OS and software, the other for my data) on this my main machine, I'm
    > >> curious to know your reasons for disliking multiple partitions.

    > >
    > > I'm not Paul, to whom you responded, but I am also someone who
    > > generally dislikes multiple partitions and recommends against them for
    > > most people. If you're curious you can read my reasons in this article
    > > I've written: "Understanding Disk Partitioning" at
    > > http://www.computorcompanion.com/LPMArticle.asp?ID=326
    > >
    > > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP

    >
    > 100% agreement with that Ken.



    Thanks very much, Dave.

    Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP
     
    Ken Blake, MVP, May 5, 2012
    #8
  9. JoeSulla

    Char Jackson Guest

    On Sat, 05 May 2012 08:46:43 -0400, Paul <> wrote:

    >Molly Gilliver wrote:
    >> In message <jo1thu$6nm$>, Paul <> writes
    >> []
    >>> I wouldn't have made those two logicals in the first place. That
    >>> would put me in a hard spot, when it comes to managing space, and facing
    >>> the situation you're in right now. From bitter experience, I know if
    >>> I make logicals now, they'll only be a roadblock later, to easy
    >>> solutions.

    >>
    >> Care to elaborate on that? Although I only have two partitions (one for
    >> the OS and software, the other for my data) on this my main machine, I'm
    >> curious to know your reasons for disliking multiple partitions.

    >
    >When you need to move logicals, it isn't very convenient.


    I wish you had explained that in a little more detail. I don't see
    anything inconvenient about logical versus primary partitions. Modern
    tools let you convert partitions from one type to the other with two
    or three mouse clicks, and moving either type is as simple as
    selecting it, selecting the Copy or Move command, and deciding where
    to put it. I use Acronis Disk Director, but there are numerous
    alternatives available.

    >Your best choice,
    >might be to make the fourth partition the extended one, and put the logicals in
    >there. But during your planning phase, you'd better get the sizes right,
    >or you're in for hours of fun. For example, if you needed to make your
    >third primary larger, you might need to shrink your logicals, shift them
    >to the right, shrink the Extended and move its left edge to the right,
    >until you have an unallocated gap suitable for making the third primary
    >partition larger. Which is a whole lot of work, with a whole lot of risk.


    Your frustration seems to be a result of the tools you're using.
    Starting around the time of Partition Magic (circa 1994 or so?),
    moving and resizing partitions became dead simple. Plus, if the
    partitions are empty or the data is not placed where it needs to be
    moved, the process of moving or resizing partitions completes in
    seconds. I consider the risk to be about on par with defragmenting.
    Not zero, but close to it. It's low enough that I never make a backup
    first, if that's any indication.

    I don't know why you're finding such simple tasks to be a "whole lot
    of work, with a whole lot of risk", but I suspect it's your tools.
     
    Char Jackson, May 5, 2012
    #9
  10. JoeSulla

    Paul Guest

    Re: Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk withoutdisturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions

    Char Jackson wrote:
    > On Sat, 05 May 2012 08:46:43 -0400, Paul <> wrote:
    >
    >> Molly Gilliver wrote:
    >>> In message <jo1thu$6nm$>, Paul <> writes
    >>> []
    >>>> I wouldn't have made those two logicals in the first place. That
    >>>> would put me in a hard spot, when it comes to managing space, and facing
    >>>> the situation you're in right now. From bitter experience, I know if
    >>>> I make logicals now, they'll only be a roadblock later, to easy
    >>>> solutions.
    >>> Care to elaborate on that? Although I only have two partitions (one for
    >>> the OS and software, the other for my data) on this my main machine, I'm
    >>> curious to know your reasons for disliking multiple partitions.

    >> When you need to move logicals, it isn't very convenient.

    >
    > I wish you had explained that in a little more detail. I don't see
    > anything inconvenient about logical versus primary partitions. Modern
    > tools let you convert partitions from one type to the other with two
    > or three mouse clicks, and moving either type is as simple as
    > selecting it, selecting the Copy or Move command, and deciding where
    > to put it. I use Acronis Disk Director, but there are numerous
    > alternatives available.
    >
    >> Your best choice,
    >> might be to make the fourth partition the extended one, and put the logicals in
    >> there. But during your planning phase, you'd better get the sizes right,
    >> or you're in for hours of fun. For example, if you needed to make your
    >> third primary larger, you might need to shrink your logicals, shift them
    >> to the right, shrink the Extended and move its left edge to the right,
    >> until you have an unallocated gap suitable for making the third primary
    >> partition larger. Which is a whole lot of work, with a whole lot of risk.

    >
    > Your frustration seems to be a result of the tools you're using.
    > Starting around the time of Partition Magic (circa 1994 or so?),
    > moving and resizing partitions became dead simple. Plus, if the
    > partitions are empty or the data is not placed where it needs to be
    > moved, the process of moving or resizing partitions completes in
    > seconds. I consider the risk to be about on par with defragmenting.
    > Not zero, but close to it. It's low enough that I never make a backup
    > first, if that's any indication.
    >
    > I don't know why you're finding such simple tasks to be a "whole lot
    > of work, with a whole lot of risk", but I suspect it's your tools.
    >


    I evaluate tools, to start, by doing a Google search and looking for
    signs of failure. There is a correlation between the complexity
    of the operation, and it's chances of failure. For example, "merge"
    is a waste of time. And I'm sure the developers of such options,
    really wish they hadn't. (Merge attempts to squash two partitions
    together. And take care of file or directory clashes or whatever.)

    Even in the simplest of operations, I can do a Google search and
    find reports of failure. One of the free utilities, managed
    to trash a FAT32 partition while resizing it. You can't get much
    simpler than that. And based on that report, I wouldn't touch that
    one with a barge pole. If it failed on a "merge", well,
    what do you expect.

    I'll leave it to anyone wishing to use a partition tool, to do
    the necessary search for themselves, and see how trustworthy
    these tools are.

    You may scoff at my copy of Partition Magic. It sucks in many
    ways. But, there are a subset of things I can do in it, that
    I've come to trust. The same approach should be used with
    any other tool you happen to find, that does partition management.
    Do a backup first, "go crazy with the clicks" if you want,
    pretend the tools is faultless. Then, check and see whether
    it messed up or not. If it messed up, restore from backup,
    and try it again, using simpler operations until you get a feel
    for it. Maybe you'll find the defects in it, are too much to
    stomach.

    It's your data, and you can be as careless with it as you want.

    Paul
     
    Paul, May 5, 2012
    #10
  11. JoeSulla

    Char Jackson Guest

    On Sat, 05 May 2012 15:49:20 -0400, Paul <> wrote:

    >Char Jackson wrote:
    >> On Sat, 05 May 2012 08:46:43 -0400, Paul <> wrote:
    >>
    >> I don't know why you're finding such simple tasks to be a "whole lot
    >> of work, with a whole lot of risk", but I suspect it's your tools.
    >>

    >
    >I evaluate tools, to start, by doing a Google search and looking for
    >signs of failure. There is a correlation between the complexity
    >of the operation, and it's chances of failure.

    ....
    >Even in the simplest of operations, I can do a Google search and
    >find reports of failure. One of the free utilities, managed

    ....
    >I'll leave it to anyone wishing to use a partition tool, to do
    >the necessary search for themselves, and see how trustworthy
    >these tools are.


    The Internet is a big place and regardless of the tools you choose,
    you'll find some clown somewhere who managed to mess something up.

    >For example, "merge"
    >is a waste of time. And I'm sure the developers of such options,
    >really wish they hadn't. (Merge attempts to squash two partitions
    >together. And take care of file or directory clashes or whatever.)


    I've only had a reason to use merge a couple of times and it worked
    without issues.

    >You may scoff at my copy of Partition Magic. It sucks in many
    >ways. But, there are a subset of things I can do in it, that
    >I've come to trust.


    I wasn't scoffing at your choice of tool (PM) because I didn't know
    what you were using. Partition Magic has been obsolete for a decade,
    but by all means use it if it's still working for you.

    All I really wanted to point out is that working with partitions
    doesn't need to be a lot of work and doesn't need to carry a lot of
    risk. It may be those things for you, but it doesn't have to be.
     
    Char Jackson, May 5, 2012
    #11
  12. JoeSulla

    JoeSulla Guest

    "Paul" <> wrote in message
    news:jo1thu$6nm$...
    > JoeSulla wrote:
    >> When I run the Dell Diagnostics on my system disk I get a Read Test Error
    >> code 0F00:0244
    >>
    >> Is that reasom enough to move the system off that disk?
    >>
    >> My system disk is 35G and has two prinary partitions - Dell Diagnostics
    >> and
    >> XP
    >>
    >> I have another disk, 500g, paritioned in to three partitions: a primary
    >> and
    >> two logicals.
    >>
    >> If it makes sense to make the bigger disk the system disk consider:
    >>
    >> The primary has no data that I want. I need the data in the other two big
    >> partitions.
    >>
    >> Reading the Acronis manual it appears that cloning the system disk onto
    >> the
    >> other one will erasse all my data in the two logical partitions.
    >>
    >> Is that correct?
    >>
    >> Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk without
    >> disturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions?
    >>
    >>
    >> Thank

    >
    > My first question would be, how trustworthy is the Dell Diagnostic ?
    > I tried a search, and wasn't able to form a strong opinion, based
    > on what people were doing with the results.
    >
    > Generally, you'd want to test with a second diagnostic, and see if it
    > reports problems in the same block.
    >
    > Both Western Digital and Seagate, offer diagnostics for download from
    > their web site. Seagate makes a self-booting version (Seatools for DOS)
    > and a version that runs from Windows, as examples of diagnostics. They
    > can have things like a "short" and a "long" test. Such tests would
    > likely include read verification.
    >
    > A lot of other disk companies, have been bought up by the big two,
    > making it more of a challenge to find the diagnostics for other
    > brands of disks.
    >
    > I can get the same sort of info as well, from some testing with
    > HDTune, but that probably won't be giving you a log to look at
    > later.
    >
    > *******
    >
    > You'll need a Partition Manager program, to do manipulations on
    > the disk partitions. For example, you could "move" the logicals to
    > the left, squeeze down the extended partition holding them, and put
    > new partitions to the right. Or, attempt to convert the logicals
    > into primary partitions. Or, try the (much more dangerous) merge
    > type operation, to squash them together and make room for more
    > partitions.
    >
    > Depending on the importance of your data though, I still like the idea
    > of backing up a disk, as a function of what you plan to do to it. If
    > I was "merging" several partitions, I'd definitely make an image of
    > the entire disk, onto a brand new disk.
    >
    > Think of it this way. You've had a disk failure, and are now "minus one
    > disk".
    > Logically, you should be buying a new (dependable) disk to add to your
    > collection, to take its place. That gives you one spare disk to play with,
    > while planning all your partition movements or changes. You can select
    > a size of disk, big enough to do maintenance on the biggest disk you've
    > got. The pricing on disks is sufficiently illogical, you can pay just
    > about anything now, whether the disk is 20GB or 2TB.
    >
    > There are partition manager programs which are available for free.
    > There are Linux discs like Gparted LiveCD (which I find scary, because
    > of the bogus messages you might see while it's running). If selecting
    > a free partition manager, run the name of the utility through Google,
    > and see if it's damaged stuff. if there are reports of it ruining disks,
    > then you'll have advanced warning (and be using that new disk for a
    > backup).
    >
    > Even Windows has some primitive capabilities. DiskPart, if you run it
    > from a Windows 7 Recovery Console, can do things like "shrink" a
    > partition.
    > You can download a Windows 7 installer DVD, and use the Recovery Console
    > on
    > it, without a license key.
    >
    > But what most people are looking for, is a reliable "non-circus" tool
    > that won't make them crazy. In which case, a commercial partition manager,
    > with a good reputation, is what you should be looking for. I revel in
    > the free crap, but also use backups to cover me, in case something goes
    > wrong. And with that "new disk to replace old disk, balance of the
    > universe"
    > approach I suggest, you should be getting an additional brand new disk, so
    > you don't have to be nearly as fearful while making these changes.
    > I don't mind moving a primary partition with a utility. That always
    > works. But some of the more complicated operations, like "merge", is
    > just asking for trouble.
    >
    > I wouldn't have made those two logicals in the first place. That
    > would put me in a hard spot, when it comes to managing space, and facing
    > the situation you're in right now. From bitter experience, I know if
    > I make logicals now, they'll only be a roadblock later, to easy solutions.
    > Sometimes you have no choice. In the old days, I had particular reasons
    > for having a computer with 20 partitions. But I just don't do stuff like
    > that any more. A lot of the old capacity barriers that caused solutions
    > like that, are gone.
    >
    > *******
    >
    > One other thing. I'm sure Acronis will be able to find how many partitions
    > are really on that disk. A Dell might have three or four. You can use
    > PTEDIT32, to check the partition types, if you want another opinion.
    >
    > ftp://ftp.symantec.com/public/english_us_canada/tools/pq/utilities/PTEDIT32.zip
    >
    > Example output from that program, showing a Dell disk.
    >
    > http://www.goodells.net/dellrestore/files/dell-tbl.gif
    >
    > *******
    >
    > In your situation, I'd probably be dropping by my local supplier,
    > and picking up another disk. On average, I buy about two disks a
    > year, just so I have a safe place to do stuff. That's better than
    > plotting and scheming, with untested partition manager utilities,
    > when you have no safety net to work with.
    >
    > Paul


    Wow! a whole course in one reply.

    Thanks
     
    JoeSulla, May 6, 2012
    #12
  13. JoeSulla

    JoeSulla Guest

    "Char Jackson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 4 May 2012 19:59:36 -0400, "JoeSulla"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>When I run the Dell Diagnostics on my system disk I get a Read Test Error
    >>code 0F00:0244
    >>
    >>Is that reasom enough to move the system off that disk?

    >
    > By itself, probably not, but you can get a second or third opinion by
    > running chkdsk and/or the drive fitness utility for your respective
    > drive.
    >
    >>My system disk is 35G and has two prinary partitions - Dell Diagnostics
    >>and
    >>XP
    >>
    >>I have another disk, 500g, paritioned in to three partitions: a primary
    >>and
    >>two logicals.
    >>
    >>If it makes sense to make the bigger disk the system disk consider:
    >>
    >>The primary has no data that I want. I need the data in the other two big
    >>partitions.
    >>
    >>Reading the Acronis manual it appears that cloning the system disk onto
    >>the
    >>other one will erasse all my data in the two logical partitions.
    >>
    >>Is that correct?

    >
    > That's correct. If you use the Clone feature, everything currently on
    > the target drive will be gone. The solution is simple: don't use the
    > Clone feature since it doesn't apply in your case.
    >
    >>Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk without
    >>disturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions?

    >
    > You need a tool that can copy partitions from drive to drive and
    > optionally adjust the size and placement of those partitions on the
    > target drive.
    >
    > I use Acronis Disk Director since it's what I have on hand. I've used
    > it numerous times to copy or move partitions, among many other
    > partition-related tasks, and it works well. I'm sure you can find a
    > similar tool, maybe even freeware, that will copy an existing
    > partition from one drive to a second drive. Copy the two partitions to
    > the big drive, make that drive bootable, and Bob's your uncle.
    >


    So I looked at Acronis Disk Director.

    What I read did not sound encouraging.

    Have you ever moved the system to a new disk?

    What do I have to do. Make unused room on the big disk and then move into
    that.

    But it sound like it will delete the original data!


    Thanks
     
    JoeSulla, May 6, 2012
    #13
  14. JoeSulla

    JoeSulla Guest

    "Paul" <> wrote in message
    news:jo1thu$6nm$...
    >
    > I wouldn't have made those two logicals in the first place. That
    > would put me in a hard spot, when it comes to managing space, and facing
    > the situation you're in right now. From bitter experience, I know if
    > I make logicals now, they'll only be a roadblock later, to easy solutions.
    > Sometimes you have no choice. In the old days, I had particular reasons
    > for having a computer with 20 partitions. But I just don't do stuff like
    > that any more. A lot of the old capacity barriers that caused solutions
    > like that, are gone.
    >


    Do you mean you would have put everything into one partition or that you
    would have created two primary partitions.

    One partition is for data that I'd back up and the other is for data that is
    not worth the effort (but since I have much space I keep it around just in
    case.)

    Thanks
     
    JoeSulla, May 6, 2012
    #14
  15. JoeSulla

    Char Jackson Guest

    On Sat, 5 May 2012 21:17:41 -0400, "JoeSulla"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"Char Jackson" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Fri, 4 May 2012 19:59:36 -0400, "JoeSulla"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>When I run the Dell Diagnostics on my system disk I get a Read Test Error
    >>>code 0F00:0244
    >>>
    >>>Is that reasom enough to move the system off that disk?

    >>
    >> By itself, probably not, but you can get a second or third opinion by
    >> running chkdsk and/or the drive fitness utility for your respective
    >> drive.
    >>
    >>>My system disk is 35G and has two prinary partitions - Dell Diagnostics
    >>>and
    >>>XP
    >>>
    >>>I have another disk, 500g, paritioned in to three partitions: a primary
    >>>and
    >>>two logicals.
    >>>
    >>>If it makes sense to make the bigger disk the system disk consider:
    >>>
    >>>The primary has no data that I want. I need the data in the other two big
    >>>partitions.
    >>>
    >>>Reading the Acronis manual it appears that cloning the system disk onto
    >>>the
    >>>other one will erasse all my data in the two logical partitions.
    >>>
    >>>Is that correct?

    >>
    >> That's correct. If you use the Clone feature, everything currently on
    >> the target drive will be gone. The solution is simple: don't use the
    >> Clone feature since it doesn't apply in your case.
    >>
    >>>Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk without
    >>>disturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions?

    >>
    >> You need a tool that can copy partitions from drive to drive and
    >> optionally adjust the size and placement of those partitions on the
    >> target drive.
    >>
    >> I use Acronis Disk Director since it's what I have on hand. I've used
    >> it numerous times to copy or move partitions, among many other
    >> partition-related tasks, and it works well. I'm sure you can find a
    >> similar tool, maybe even freeware, that will copy an existing
    >> partition from one drive to a second drive. Copy the two partitions to
    >> the big drive, make that drive bootable, and Bob's your uncle.
    >>

    >
    >So I looked at Acronis Disk Director.
    >
    >What I read did not sound encouraging.


    I don't know what you read.

    >Have you ever moved the system to a new disk?


    Frequently. I've done it for myself multiple times and for clients
    dozens and dozens of times.

    >What do I have to do. Make unused room on the big disk and then move into
    >that.


    Yes. When you look at your big drive with something like Disk
    Director, you'll see the primary partition, followed by a container
    that holds two logical partitions. You'll also graphically see how
    much free space each partition has.

    You said you don't care about the primary partition on the big drive,
    so select it and delete it. If the new free space is at least 35 GB,
    you're ready to copy the two partitions from the small drive into that
    space.

    If the new free space isn't big enough to hold the two small
    partitions, you need to make more room by sliding everything to the
    right. You'll do so by starting on the right and working left, as
    follows. Grab the left edge of the second logical partition and drag
    it right to make it smaller. Then drag the first logical to the right
    so it once again bumps up against the second logical. Then grab the
    left edge of the first logical and drag it right to shrink it. Don't
    worry, you can't accidentally shrink a partition smaller than the
    amount of data it currently holds. Now grab the container that's
    holding the two logicals and shrink it by dragging the left edge to
    the right.

    After all that, I assume you have more than enough room to copy the
    two partitions from the small drive to the free space on the big
    drive. Select them, one at a time, and place them on the big drive
    where you want them.

    At this point, absolutely nothing has been done to your drives yet. If
    you're satisfied with the changes you've made, it's time to "commit"
    them. This is when the changes get applied. It'll more than likely
    force you to reboot to do most of the work so that Windows doesn't get
    in the way.

    >But it sound like it will delete the original data!


    That's up to you. You've said you care about the two logical
    partitions on the big drive, so don't delete them.

    If you do all of the above, your big drive will contain all of your
    data, including the data currently on the small drive, but the big
    drive won't be bootable yet. Have your Windows CD/DVD ready so you can
    either repair the boot files, or simply run fixboot which should do
    the same thing.

    Lastly, keep in mind that nothing described above is destructive to
    your current small drive, so you can always put it back and boot from
    it if you need to. Don't blow it away until you're happy with the big
    drive and how it's laid out.
     
    Char Jackson, May 6, 2012
    #15
  16. JoeSulla

    Paul Guest

    Re: Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk withoutdisturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions

    JoeSulla wrote:
    > "Char Jackson" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> On Fri, 4 May 2012 19:59:36 -0400, "JoeSulla"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> When I run the Dell Diagnostics on my system disk I get a Read Test Error
    >>> code 0F00:0244
    >>>
    >>> Is that reasom enough to move the system off that disk?

    >> By itself, probably not, but you can get a second or third opinion by
    >> running chkdsk and/or the drive fitness utility for your respective
    >> drive.
    >>
    >>> My system disk is 35G and has two prinary partitions - Dell Diagnostics
    >>> and
    >>> XP
    >>>
    >>> I have another disk, 500g, paritioned in to three partitions: a primary
    >>> and
    >>> two logicals.
    >>>
    >>> If it makes sense to make the bigger disk the system disk consider:
    >>>
    >>> The primary has no data that I want. I need the data in the other two big
    >>> partitions.
    >>>
    >>> Reading the Acronis manual it appears that cloning the system disk onto
    >>> the
    >>> other one will erasse all my data in the two logical partitions.
    >>>
    >>> Is that correct?

    >> That's correct. If you use the Clone feature, everything currently on
    >> the target drive will be gone. The solution is simple: don't use the
    >> Clone feature since it doesn't apply in your case.
    >>
    >>> Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk without
    >>> disturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions?

    >> You need a tool that can copy partitions from drive to drive and
    >> optionally adjust the size and placement of those partitions on the
    >> target drive.
    >>
    >> I use Acronis Disk Director since it's what I have on hand. I've used
    >> it numerous times to copy or move partitions, among many other
    >> partition-related tasks, and it works well. I'm sure you can find a
    >> similar tool, maybe even freeware, that will copy an existing
    >> partition from one drive to a second drive. Copy the two partitions to
    >> the big drive, make that drive bootable, and Bob's your uncle.
    >>

    >
    > So I looked at Acronis Disk Director.
    >
    > What I read did not sound encouraging.
    >
    > Have you ever moved the system to a new disk?
    >
    > What do I have to do. Make unused room on the big disk and then move into
    > that.
    >
    > But it sound like it will delete the original data!
    >
    >
    > Thanks


    The first thing I'd want to do, is *double check* how many primary partitions
    are coming from the small disk, over to the big disk.

    You can use PTEDIT32 to capture the relevant details. And post a picture
    of the contents, if you don't want to type all those numbers in.

    Let's take this one as an example.

    http://www.goodells.net/dellrestore/files/dell-tbl.gif

    Slots 1,2,3 are occupied. I'd want to eyeball the destination disk,
    and see if slots 1,2,3 are free. The extended could be the fourth
    slot for example (unlikely, but you might get lucky). Or perhaps,
    after the move is made by the partition manager, it'll push the
    (data-only) extended with two logicals, into the fourth slot.
    By preserving slot locations, that helps prevent things like
    boot.ini from needing to be corrected. It doesn't really matter
    which slot the partition entries are in, as far as the operation
    of basics are concerned. But it does affect processes such as booting.

    The partition manager I use, Partition Magic, will screw with the slot numbers,
    in an effort to preserve src-dest slot numbers. In the example above,
    slot 2 of that Dell example is the boot partition. If I use a partition manager
    to move it, it should go into slot 2 on the destination disk. And the tool may
    decide to move the entry already in slot 2 on the other disk, into a new location.
    Then, it's all a matter of whether that causes side effects or not. A data-only
    partition, on the surface it doesn't care about being moved. If it was an EXT2
    partition on a Linux system, I'd have to go into /etc/fstab and correct the
    reference to that partition, as it would now be wrong (and my data partition
    would no longer mount, until the reference to it was fixed).

    What I try to do, when planning these things, is make the decisions for
    the tool. Sorta like "guiding a landing" so I get the results I expect.
    Because my experience is, if you leave things to chance, you may need to
    do a lot more data movement, to fix everything properly. (I.e. You
    "click a bunch of buttons", after it's done, some things work and
    some things are broken. I'm trying to encourage enough planning,
    so you get it right on the first try.)

    As another example, if I was about to shrink a partition, I might be
    tempted to defragment it. A typical defragmenter, has a "push to the
    left" methodology (otherwise known as optimization, rather than actual
    defragmentation). If I'm shrinking a partition, defragging with a good
    tool, makes sure as many structures as possible, have been moved out
    of the way to begin with. Which makes it a "slam dunk" for the tool
    doing the actual shrink, as the next step.

    In this example, I'd be attempting to move my Dell disk, over to my
    larger disk on the right. I happen to have room for the three primaries
    on Disk 2, so practically nothing can go wrong here.

    Disk 1 Type Disk 2 Type
    ------ ------
    Slot 1 DE Slot 1 <empty>
    Slot 2 07 Slot 2 <empty>
    Slot 3 DB Slot 3 <empty>
    Slot 4 <empty> Slot 4 Extended (containing two data-only logicals)

    (You can get some info on partition types here. Referencing this, is to
    show the level of confusion a lack of standards has caused.)

    http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/partitions/partition_types-1.html

    I made up a sample disk in a VM, to show what three primaries plus
    an extended with two logicals would look like. The extended partition
    ended up with a partition type of 0x0F.

    Now, if I moved the three primaries on my other disk, in place
    of the three primaries on my sample disk in this example, the
    whole operation would be seamless. As the extended and two logicals
    aren't going anywhere. I'd expect no side effects. Only the first
    three slots, are going to get changed out. (I.e. "Output", "CAT",
    and "DOG" would be replaced with the ones from the other disk.)

    http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/6564/threepriplusextend.gif

    Paul
     
    Paul, May 6, 2012
    #16
  17. JoeSulla

    JoeSulla Guest

    JoeSulla, May 6, 2012
    #17
  18. JoeSulla

    JoeSulla Guest

    "Char Jackson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >>What I read did not sound encouraging.

    >
    > I don't know what you read.
    >

    Right.
    I believe I read that Move deletes the copied files.
    And Copy said for bootable see Move.

    I hope I remember that right!



    >>Have you ever moved the system to a new disk?

    >
    > Frequently. I've done it for myself multiple times and for clients
    > dozens and dozens of times.
    >
    >>What do I have to do. Make unused room on the big disk and then move into
    >>that.

    >
    > Yes. When you look at your big drive with something like Disk
    > Director, you'll see the primary partition, followed by a container
    > that holds two logical partitions. You'll also graphically see how
    > much free space each partition has.
    >
    > You said you don't care about the primary partition on the big drive,
    > so select it and delete it. If the new free space is at least 35 GB,
    > you're ready to copy the two partitions from the small drive into that
    > space.
    >
    > If the new free space isn't big enough to hold the two small
    > partitions, you need to make more room by sliding everything to the
    > right. You'll do so by starting on the right and working left, as
    > follows. Grab the left edge of the second logical partition and drag
    > it right to make it smaller. Then drag the first logical to the right
    > so it once again bumps up against the second logical. Then grab the
    > left edge of the first logical and drag it right to shrink it. Don't
    > worry, you can't accidentally shrink a partition smaller than the
    > amount of data it currently holds. Now grab the container that's
    > holding the two logicals and shrink it by dragging the left edge to
    > the right.
    >
    > After all that, I assume you have more than enough room to copy the
    > two partitions from the small drive to the free space on the big
    > drive. Select them, one at a time, and place them on the big drive
    > where you want them.
    >
    > At this point, absolutely nothing has been done to your drives yet. If
    > you're satisfied with the changes you've made, it's time to "commit"
    > them. This is when the changes get applied. It'll more than likely
    > force you to reboot to do most of the work so that Windows doesn't get
    > in the way.
    >
    >>But it sound like it will delete the original data!



    Again I wasn't clear. I meant on the small disk - that is the copied data.



    >
    > That's up to you. You've said you care about the two logical
    > partitions on the big drive, so don't delete them.
    >
    > If you do all of the above, your big drive will contain all of your
    > data, including the data currently on the small drive, but the big
    > drive won't be bootable yet. Have your Windows CD/DVD ready so you can
    > either repair the boot files, or simply run fixboot which should do
    > the same thing.
    >
    > Lastly, keep in mind that nothing described above is destructive to
    > your current small drive, so you can always put it back and boot from
    > it if you need to. Don't blow it away until you're happy with the big
    > drive and how it's laid out.
    >


    Is this true of Move or should I use Copy.

    Thanks a lot
     
    JoeSulla, May 6, 2012
    #18
  19. JoeSulla

    Paul Guest

    Re: Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk withoutdisturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions

    JoeSulla wrote:
    > "Paul" <> wrote in message
    > news:jo5c0q$u47$...
    > > You can use PTEDIT32 to capture the relevant details. And post a picture
    >> of the contents, if you don't want to type all those numbers in.
    >>

    >
    >
    > http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/213/ptedit32fordef.gif/
    > http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/140/ptedit32forc.gif/
    > http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/843/partitions.gif/
    >
    >


    On the first picture (ptedit32fordef.gif), you'll be removing the
    first entry (it's an empty one). The second entry (0x0F extended partition
    with two logicals), can move down to the third or fourth slot. This
    is to preserve the spatial order of the partitions (have slots in same
    order as partitions on the disk). In fact, there is no reason for
    a partition manager to do that, and if a non-spatial order is selected,
    it just means more confusion for the user.

    When the first 0x07 partition is removed from the 500GB disk, that
    frees up 139GB.

    The two primaries on the Dell disk, take about 40GB in total (I nearly
    missed that one was in units of megabytes :) ), give or take.
    That will easily fit in the 139GB hole.

    The partition table, after copying them, should look like this.
    I would guess a partition manager would do it this way. As a user,
    you don't normally get to dictate the slot structure.

    (500GB disk)

    1) DE 00 ... 80262 sectors
    2) 07 80 ... 70220115 sectors
    3) 0F 00 ... 683292645 sectors (home of the two logicals)
    4) 00 00 ... 0 sectors (unused slot)

    Since the 0x07 partition has the boot flag set, you want the
    partition manager to put it in the same relative slot on the
    destination disk. If it ends up some place other than slot 2,
    then you'd want to double check, that the contents of boot.ini
    (ARC path specification to that partition) is corrected.

    The 0x0F partition, spatially, could also be arranged like this,
    but a Partition Manager won't do this on its own. Such an arrangement
    would leave room for another primary partition (using the 100GB or
    so left over and unallocated, after the empty Music partition is
    removed. The partition manager would eventually do it this way,
    if you tried to sandwich a new primary, in the leftover space
    just before the extended one.

    1) DE 00 ... 80262 sectors
    2) 07 80 ... 70220115 sectors
    3) 00 00 ... 0 sectors (an unused slot)
    4) 0F 00 ... 683292645 sectors (home of the two logicals)

    It's possible, to take PTEDIT32, and copy and paste the numbers
    from one slot to another. In other words, I could manually edit
    to change the "(500GB)" content, and make it look like the other
    one I typed in. I've done that, moved a slot with PTEDIT32.
    After you save, you reboot.

    So either of the two pictures is functional. The first picture,
    leaves room for a primary after the two logicals. But I don't like
    that as a plan, due to it causing more work in the future (for the
    disk drive), when capacity changes need to be made to a partition.
    I'd prefer the second picture, leaving room for a primary between it
    and the extended with two logicals. That way, I can squeeze the
    logicals to the right in the future, if I wanted to make the primary
    larger. And as primaries go, that primary is plenty large for any OS
    experiments you might want to try. I use 40GB for Windows 7 for
    example (kinda tight, but barely workable), so there'd be room
    for an OS of that class.

    I don't expect you'll have a problem with this move.

    Just check and make sure the two partitions end up where expected,
    in slot 1 and slot 2. I don't know if the Dell has any expectations
    on slots. If you ever needed to run the Dell recovery software in
    the future, it may stomp all over the setup anyway, and it might be
    marginally better to have them in roughly the same order. The Dell software
    may not be too clever. In general, installers for OSes, are some of
    the most poorly written pieces of software around. (Like, ask me
    how I felt, after trying my Win2K installer CD, doing some
    partition planning, *not* punching any buttons to do anything,
    doing a reboot, and finding partitions had been erased. Very
    amusing, Microsoft. I used Testdisk, and my foggy memory of
    the correct partition structure, to fix that, so nothing was
    lost.)

    Have fun,
    Paul
     
    Paul, May 6, 2012
    #19
  20. JoeSulla

    Paul Guest

    Re: Is there some way I can make the bigger disk my system disk withoutdisturbing the data that is in the two logical parttions

    Paul wrote:
    > JoeSulla wrote:
    >> "Paul" <> wrote in message
    >> news:jo5c0q$u47$...
    >> > You can use PTEDIT32 to capture the relevant details. And post a picture
    >>> of the contents, if you don't want to type all those numbers in.
    >>>

    >>
    >> http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/213/ptedit32fordef.gif/
    >> http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/140/ptedit32forc.gif/
    >> http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/843/partitions.gif/
    >>


    One other thing.

    Before booting the 500GB disk for the first time, after
    everything has been moved to your satisfaction, don't
    forget to temporarily disconnect the smaller old disk.

    The OS should not be able to "see" the old disk for the
    first boot, when you boot from the "new" disk. Once one
    boot cycle has been completed using the 500GB as the boot
    device, you can shut down and reconnect the old disk if
    you want. Doing it that way, helps keep the disks
    independent of one another. I've never figured out
    what breaks, when leaving them both connected, and
    booting the new disk. I just disconnect the old one
    for the first boot, and all works well afterwards
    (for whatever reason).

    Paul
     
    Paul, May 6, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. James Bowery

    Upgrading To Bigger System Disk

    James Bowery, Oct 16, 2003, in forum: Windows XP General
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    283
    Alex Nichol
    Oct 17, 2003
  2. Mike
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    393
    Paul Knudsen
    Nov 30, 2005
  3. N Jahan

    DVD drive is disturbing

    N Jahan, Dec 23, 2006, in forum: Windows XP General
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    144
  4. Academia
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    217
    John John
    Jan 8, 2008
  5. skip
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    190
Loading...

Share This Page