Partitioning logistics

[Guest]

I’ve been reading the partitioning threads for the last few months and (I
think) I have a (generic) handle on what’s been discussed so far …but…if I
have Windows XP and applications on C: (disk 0), would it be a good idea to
separate out and move individual partitions for music files, photo files,
spreadsheet files and “other†documents to disk 1 for performance reasons?
I've recently upgraded from my single 40GB hard drive to two 120GB IDE hard
drives and just learned how to partition and use Ghost. Does anyone have a
suggestion for optimizing performance when adding a second hard drive? I've
been told ( and it seems to be confirmed at
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;314482 ) to move my
page file to the beginning of the second hard drive in it's own partition D:
at the beginning of disk 1, so it will be on a drive that's not busy. Does
this also mean that disk 1 needs to be on it’s own IDE channel? That would
require the CD burner and the DVD burner to be slaves to the hard drives
(instead of on their own channel) which I’m told slows down the hard drives
If I move the individual partitions for music, photos, etc., to disk 1,
would that defeat the purpose of having the page file on a drive that's not
busy? Or, by having the apps and the data on two separate drives, would that
be faster by allowing both to be accessed at the same time? Maybe it would
be better to use disk 1 for just the page file and backups/image files .
Or......
ARRRGGGHHH!!!!!!

 

[Steve Shattuck]

I've been reading the partitioning threads for the last few months and (I
think) I have a (generic) handle on what's been discussed so far .but.if I
have Windows XP and applications on C: (disk 0), would it be a good idea
to
separate out and move individual partitions for music files, photo files,
spreadsheet files and "other" documents to disk 1 for performance reasons?
I've recently upgraded from my single 40GB hard drive to two 120GB IDE
hard
drives and just learned how to partition and use Ghost. Does anyone have
a
suggestion for optimizing performance when adding a second hard drive?
I've
been told ( and it seems to be confirmed at
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;314482 ) to move
my
page file to the beginning of the second hard drive in it's own partition
D:
at the beginning of disk 1, so it will be on a drive that's not busy.
Does
this also mean that disk 1 needs to be on it's own IDE channel? That
would
require the CD burner and the DVD burner to be slaves to the hard drives
(instead of on their own channel) which I'm told slows down the hard
drives
If I move the individual partitions for music, photos, etc., to disk 1,
would that defeat the purpose of having the page file on a drive that's
not
busy? Or, by having the apps and the data on two separate drives, would
that
be faster by allowing both to be accessed at the same time? Maybe it
would
be better to use disk 1 for just the page file and backups/image files .
Or......
ARRRGGGHHH!!!!!!

In the good old days, you could do a lot of tricks with partitioning, data
placement and page file manipulation to improve performance. Assuming you
have an adequate XP machine, i.e new HD's and 512MB of memory, except for
some really intensive applications, like photo editing, it is probably a
waste of time to worry about partitioning for any reason other than
convenience. HD's are so fast, and XP is so good a caching and page file
management that you are squeezing the last drop of juice from the lemon
after 10 people have already mashed it. If it floats your boat to get an
extra 5-10 seconds per day of performance from your machine, feel free.

 

[Ken Blake]

In

I've been reading the partitioning threads for the last few
months
and (I think) I have a (generic) handle on what's been
discussed so
far .but.if I have Windows XP and applications on C: (disk 0),
would
it be a good idea to separate out and move individual
partitions for
music files, photo files, spreadsheet files and "other"
documents to
disk 1 for performance reasons?

No. Whatever benefits such a partitioning scheme may have are for
organizational reasons, not performance ones.

 

[DKF]

Pardon me for jumping in but I have a partitioning issue. I just ordered a
laptop with an 80G HD running XP Home which I'm sure will not be
partitioned. I have 2 HD's in all my desktops and use Driveimage 2002.
Since they also used to make partition magic, can I use DI 2002 to create a
2nd software partition on my laptop so I'll have a place to store my drive
images? Thanks in advance for any help you can give me.

 

[Frank]

Drive Image 2002 is for W98 and NT4. One needs drive image 7 for
W2K and WXP. (as it states on the CD label and paperwork)

 

[Ken Blake]

In

Pardon me for jumping in but I have a partitioning issue. I
just
ordered a laptop with an 80G HD running XP Home which I'm sure
will
not be partitioned.

A word on the termonology: "Partitioning" is the act of cretaing
one or more partitions on a drive. So it *will* be partitioned.
You wouldn't be able to use it otherwise.

What you mean to say is that it won't have more than one
partition.

I have 2 HD's in all my desktops and use
Driveimage 2002. Since they also used to make partition magic,
can I
use DI 2002 to create a 2nd software partition on my laptop so
I'll
have a place to store my drive images? Thanks in advance for
any
help you can give me.

Sorry, no. DI and Partition Magic are different products with
different capabilities.

By the way, if you want to create a second partition for backup,
I'd rethink that strategy if I were you. That's better than no
backup at all, but just barely.It leaves you vulnerable to
simultanewous loss of the original and backup through most of the
most common dangers to your data: hard drive failure, virus
attackes, power glitches, like nearby lightning strikes (when
you're no running on battery power), theft of the computer
(especially significant with a laptop), etc.

 

[noyb]

What I do is have my C: drive be the warehouse for Windows and Applications.
I make images of this about every 2 weeks (things for me don't change much).
On my D: drive I have all my important documents. These I copy. I don't want
to rely on a possible bad Image to recover files. I do these about every
week.
E: drive I keep files that if lost won't be a big deal. I don't do any
backups.

 

[Ted Zieglar]

Good advice from noyb. I follow a similar approach, however I backup
('image') my system partition more often. It's quick and easy to do so I
figure "why not?"

I want to amplify one point that noyb made. It's the idea of a second line
of defense. In addition to backing up my important documents, I also burn
them to a DVD once a month, sometimes more often. That way, in the unlikely
event that there's a problem with my backup software, or a problem with my
computer that makes it impossible to use my backup software, I have a
reasonably current copy of my important documents that I can easily recover
or transfer to another computer.

 

[Dave Waller]

I've been reading the partitioning threads for the last few months and (I
think) I have a (generic) handle on what's been discussed so far .but.if I
have Windows XP and applications on C: (disk 0), would it be a good idea
to
separate out and move individual partitions for music files, photo files,
spreadsheet files and "other" documents to disk 1 for performance reasons?
I've recently upgraded from my single 40GB hard drive to two 120GB IDE
hard
drives and just learned how to partition and use Ghost. Does anyone have
a
suggestion for optimizing performance when adding a second hard drive?
I've
been told ( and it seems to be confirmed at
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;314482 ) to move
my
page file to the beginning of the second hard drive in it's own partition
D:
at the beginning of disk 1, so it will be on a drive that's not busy.
Does
this also mean that disk 1 needs to be on it's own IDE channel? That
would
require the CD burner and the DVD burner to be slaves to the hard drives
(instead of on their own channel) which I'm told slows down the hard
drives
If I move the individual partitions for music, photos, etc., to disk 1,
would that defeat the purpose of having the page file on a drive that's
not
busy? Or, by having the apps and the data on two separate drives, would
that
be faster by allowing both to be accessed at the same time? Maybe it
would
be better to use disk 1 for just the page file and backups/image files .
Or......
ARRRGGGHHH!!!!!!

On a similar question if you do create partitions or a drive d, is there any
way to
set up My Documents to point to the drive D. That way the users on my
machine
will automatically be placing their files on the D drive, without thinking.
Thanks
Dave

 

[=?iso-8859-1?B?uyBtcnRlZSCr?=]

right click "my documents" select "properties" change the location.

--
Just my 2¢ worth,
Jeff
__________In response to__________
| On a similar question if you do create partitions or a drive d, is there any
| way to
| set up My Documents to point to the drive D. That way the users on my
| machine
| will automatically be placing their files on the D drive, without thinking.
| Thanks
| Dave
|
|

 

[Dave Waller]

Jeff,
Thanks for your help, this is just the info I was after
Dave
right click "my documents" select "properties" change the location.

--
Just my 2¢ worth,
Jeff
__________In response to__________
| On a similar question if you do create partitions or a drive d, is there
any
| way to
| set up My Documents to point to the drive D. That way the users on my
| machine
| will automatically be placing their files on the D drive, without
thinking.
| Thanks
| Dave
|
|

 

[Guest]

Thanks all for the info and suggestions.

What I do is have my C: drive be the warehouse for Windows and Applications.
I make images of this about every 2 weeks (things for me don't change much).
On my D: drive I have all my important documents. These I copy. I don't want
to rely on a possible bad Image to recover files. I do these about every
week.
E: drive I keep files that if lost won't be a big deal. I don't do any
backups.