Hi, I heard it's a good idea to install Windows on separate disk. What if I install programs such as firewall, antivirus, cleansweep on the same disk? Would that be a good idea as well, or I'm better off putting them on second disk?
Thanks
Thanks
I have everything on a single disk, but on multiple partitions. First partition is the system partition, where windows + programs reside. I've set aside 5 gigs for this. Then there's a source+data partition of 1.5 gigs, a fat32 partition (has windows install files and is available from DOS), and a couple partitions for videos, games, downloads etc.
The idea of keeping partitions separate is that in case one has a filesystem crash, the others won't. It's espially important to keep your sourcecode and documents safe :), and it's nice having windows+apps separate too, since that volumes usually doesn't have a lot of disk writes. So this basically means that if one of the "junk" partitions (games or downloads) which has a lot of write access crashes, the rest of the system isn't that affected.
Of course it's not very likely to have a NTFS partition crash unless you're doing driver development or have bad hardware, but it's still good practice.
The most advantagous thing of a separate physical disk (and not just a partition) would be putting your pagefile there....
The idea of keeping partitions separate is that in case one has a filesystem crash, the others won't. It's espially important to keep your sourcecode and documents safe :), and it's nice having windows+apps separate too, since that volumes usually doesn't have a lot of disk writes. So this basically means that if one of the "junk" partitions (games or downloads) which has a lot of write access crashes, the rest of the system isn't that affected.
Of course it's not very likely to have a NTFS partition crash unless you're doing driver development or have bad hardware, but it's still good practice.
The most advantagous thing of a separate physical disk (and not just a partition) would be putting your pagefile there....
Hey, thanks.
What profit would be from putting Windows on separate disk. Is it security or performance? I've noticed it becomes common practice to keep Windows on separate disks.
I see that crashing could affect vital programs.
The partition aprroach looks a little complicated for me :] I'm not sure what exactly to which partition go.
Thanks again.
What profit would be from putting Windows on separate disk. Is it security or performance? I've noticed it becomes common practice to keep Windows on separate disks.
I see that crashing could affect vital programs.
The partition aprroach looks a little complicated for me :] I'm not sure what exactly to which partition go.
Thanks again.
Partition approach is really no more complicated than using multiple disks. A partition gives you a drive letter - same as with a disk. You can think of partitions as "logical disks", if that makes it easier :).
I can't really see an advantage in putting windows on a separate physical disk, putting it on a separate partition should be enough. I also can't see why one would separate windows from the application files. But keeping windows+apps, source+docs, and "often changed stuff" on three separate partitions is good.
Again, putting the swap file on a separate physical disk can be good for performance, if you are often in low-memory situations. I'd rather get a gigabyte of ram than an extra drive, though.
I can't really see an advantage in putting windows on a separate physical disk, putting it on a separate partition should be enough. I also can't see why one would separate windows from the application files. But keeping windows+apps, source+docs, and "often changed stuff" on three separate partitions is good.
Again, putting the swap file on a separate physical disk can be good for performance, if you are often in low-memory situations. I'd rather get a gigabyte of ram than an extra drive, though.
Thanks, I'm going to build a new system. I was wondering how to organize files.
I don't even know which HD I'm going to pick.
I have lots of thinking before I buy parts.
Thanks
I don't even know which HD I'm going to pick.
I have lots of thinking before I buy parts.
Thanks
For what it's worth, I have partitioned my 80gig drive this way:
system (windows + apps) - 5 gigs
source (source + docs) - 1.5 gigs
dump (download, vidoes, ...) - 30 gigs
games (games and extra dump) - 37 gigs
fatdump (fat32 windows install) - 4 gigs
When I get my new system, I'll probably make a system partition of 8-10 gigs, so I can install all of MSDN instead of using it from CD, as well as some other references I currently keep in CD form. All partitions except fatdump is kept as NTFS, and the only reason I have the fatdump is that I have the "i386" folder from my windows CD there, so I can quickly install an unattended setup (this is becoming less important after I've started using nLite to create a bootable ISO with unattended setup).
As for which drive to pick... that's almost a religious decision. Stay away from IBM/hitachi. I personally have good experience with maxtors, other people like western digital og seagate. I wouldn't by a disk from any other than those three, I guess. Whether you go for a SATA drive or a regular disk, be sure to get at least 8MB of cache, aim for a low seek-time, and 7200rpm.
If you have important data, you might want to get two drives and a RAID controller, and run in RAID mirror mode - just remember that this is *not* a replacement for backing up, it's a prevention against emergency disk crashes.
system (windows + apps) - 5 gigs
source (source + docs) - 1.5 gigs
dump (download, vidoes, ...) - 30 gigs
games (games and extra dump) - 37 gigs
fatdump (fat32 windows install) - 4 gigs
When I get my new system, I'll probably make a system partition of 8-10 gigs, so I can install all of MSDN instead of using it from CD, as well as some other references I currently keep in CD form. All partitions except fatdump is kept as NTFS, and the only reason I have the fatdump is that I have the "i386" folder from my windows CD there, so I can quickly install an unattended setup (this is becoming less important after I've started using nLite to create a bootable ISO with unattended setup).
As for which drive to pick... that's almost a religious decision. Stay away from IBM/hitachi. I personally have good experience with maxtors, other people like western digital og seagate. I wouldn't by a disk from any other than those three, I guess. Whether you go for a SATA drive or a regular disk, be sure to get at least 8MB of cache, aim for a low seek-time, and 7200rpm.
If you have important data, you might want to get two drives and a RAID controller, and run in RAID mirror mode - just remember that this is *not* a replacement for backing up, it's a prevention against emergency disk crashes.