Second hard drive master/slave

[Guest]

I recently installed a second hard drive as IDE2 slave with my DVD writer as
IDE2 master. I have since read that it is best to keep both hard drives on
the IDE1 channel.

Could someone please confirm the logistics of the setup - will performance
be compromised with my current setup (one of the reasons for adding the
second drive was the improved performance by storing the pagefile and all
data separate from the programs).

Thanks,
Dan.

 

[DL]

Its debateable as to whether moving the page file to a separate hd will
increase performance, at least noticably
Moving data likewise.
Assuming your data is video or similar, performance is more likely to be
affected by memory

 

[lomaca]

I recently installed a second hard drive as IDE2 slave with my DVD
writer as
IDE2 master. I have since read that it is best to keep both hard drives
on
the IDE1 channel.

Could someone please confirm the logistics of the setup - will
performance
be compromised with my current setup (one of the reasons for adding
the
second drive was the improved performance by storing the pagefile and
all
data separate from the programs).

Thanks,
Dan.

The only problem I can see is, that when the dvd drive is in use it
will restrict the slave HD's transfer speed.
It would be better if you set the HD as the master, and the DVD drive
as the slave.
Cheers

 

[JS]

Best to installed the new Hard Drive as the slave on IDE1.
As a slave on IDE2 with your DVD the hard drive will most likely drop down
to DMA2 speed which is far to slow for any performance gain.

As for the pagefile being located on the second drive, it may be a bit
faster and will help when defragging the C: drive as it will no longer be in
the way of or in fragments which the defragmenter can not deal with. I
relocated my pagefile to the second drive (creating the first partition as a
small size about twice the size of my pagefile) and is a fixed 'Custom' size
(not managed by windows).

Jim

 

[Jim Lewandowski]

Best to installed the new Hard Drive as the slave on IDE1.
As a slave on IDE2 with your DVD the hard drive will most likely drop down to DMA2 speed
which is far to slow for any performance gain.

***
Hasn't been true for 10+ years.

Run HDtach to prove you won't lose performance by having your 2nd hard drive on another
IDE along with an optical drive. I did.

As for the pagefile being located on the second drive, it may be a bit faster and will
help when defragging the C: drive as it will no longer be in the way of or in fragments
which the defragmenter can not deal with. I relocated my pagefile to the second drive
(creating the first partition as a small size about twice the size of my pagefile) and
is a fixed 'Custom' size (not managed by windows).

***
1) do you do any READS from your pagefile.
2) do you have write caching enabled for your hard drives?

JL

 

[Jim Lewandowski]

The only problem I can see is, that when the dvd drive is in use it
will restrict the slave HD's transfer speed.

***
How often does this occur? When writing an optical, and a hard drive "disc image" is
used, even if the disc image hard drive and optical are on the SAME IDE, the optical is SO
slow comparitively, the hard drive will peel the data at a fast enough rate to keep the
optical busy writing.

For purity's sake, I placed my optical WRITE drive on the same drive as my boot drive (IDE
#0 slot) so the "disc image" is written from my second hard drive which IS on another IDE
controller.

JL

 

[lomaca]

"For purity's sake, I placed my optical WRITE drive on the same drive
as my boot drive (IDE
#0 slot) so the "disc image" is written from my second hard drive which
IS on another IDE controller."

What does this mean or prove?

Try the setup the OP has.

Now, just use the DVD for playing music, never mind writing, and at the
same time run a database app. like Access or similar from the first HD,
WITH THE DATABASE, containing the actual data, SITTING ON THE SECOND
HD, (which is slaved to the DVD as per original setup.)
I think you will be surprised.