From: Tony Wright (horseman_at_ibm.net)
Date: Wed Nov 03 1999 - 04:00:57 EST
Bill Morrow wrote:
> the main advantage is the drive letters don't change when you add a 2nd
> HDD (that is a bootable drive, as most are) to the ultrabay..
Not wishing to unduly denigrate Bills worthy advice but regrettably his
statement is incomplete at best and misleading at worst as it all
depends on:
1. What partitions are defined on specific drives as Primary or
Logicals....
2. The impact consequent on other devices that may be attached that are
subsequently assigned drive letters after logicals.
3. What operating system and Filesystem type are used.
4. What OS and hence functionality for reserving removable media drive
letters is available.
5. Whether partitions are subsequently hidden (eg via PQ's
Partition/Boot Magic).
Whether it is recommended or not all depends on ones backup methodology,
working practises, applications,knowledge, aptitude and ultimately
personal preferences.
Seperating partitions for say Applications and Data individually
requires more forethought in both design/structure(inc FS types)
particularly when sharing data between different OS's, and in initially
configuring apps to point to specific DATA partitions but may be
preferred to aid ease(size/elapsed time) of backups as well as reducing
(re)configuring/installing problems if OS has to be re-loaded at any
time....
Other factors including reduced cluster size depend on FS used and
probably reducing directory/file index search times by partitioning on a
single HDD may be insignificant but optimising both FS and partition
size on multiple HDD's may yield significant performance improvements.
(eg by the well known simple expedient of relocating a virtual memory
swap file to the most used partition of the least used physical HDD).
Bill is at least correct in alluding to requirement to plan or foresee
the possible implications of adding further DASD devices.
However I respectively submit that to provide a more comprehensive
reccommendation as to re-partitioning in the original poster's scenario
would require far greater detail on Apps(any databases,record
sizes),users knowledge,future requirements,OS's,backups,working
practises, etc etc... and even then the users own "comfort factor" can
only be judged by the original poster anyway<g>.
> Guy Pelchat wrote:
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <JEShoemaker_at_aol.com>
> > To: <thinkpad_at_cs.utk.edu>
> > Cc: <bill_at_thinkpads.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, October 28, 1999 7:29 AM
> > Subject: Using Partition Magic 4.0
> >
> > > I recently coverted my 770X 8.1GB HDD to FAT 32
> > > using Windows 98's Fat convertor utility. When I asked
> > > about this, Bill Morrow and others suggested also using
> > > Partition Magic 4.0 to change the 2 partitions to just one
> > > 8.1GB partition.
> >
> > What are the advantages of one large partition over two smaller ones?
> >
> > Guy
>
> --
> Live Long and Prosper, Happy trails...
>
> ** Bill Morrow ** :-)
> WEB page http://thinkpads.com, new site coming:
> http://www.roadwarriortrading.com
> Thinkpad User Community: http://thinkpads.com/enter.html
> Compuserve Thinkpad(c) Forum Sysop, Webmaster
> http://www.roadwarriortrading.com
> e-mail: bill_at_thinkpads.com, penzance_at_icanect.net
>
> use the delete key to avoid unwanted flames,
> any mis-spellings are the fault of the spell checker, poor typing skills
> or i just don't care.. :-)
-- Rgds Tony W Email: horseman_at_ibm.net"humanum est errare: To err is human .... and to fail is to be a Project Manager... ...but to foul things up completely needs a computer!"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:55:32 EST