Does it make sense for a separate documents partition?

If you only have one hard drive it really dosent matter how many partitions you have. If the drive dies it all dies.

The only way to be sure is to have multiple hard drives.

I use 6 internals and 2 externals.

Windows and all my programs are installed on C:/ and all my stuff is everywhere else. But safe none the less.

Remember your C:/ drive gets the most wear and tear since it host your OS. So multi partition is really useless.

joel406 said:

If you only have one hard drive it really dosent matter how many partitions you have. If the drive dies it all dies.

The only way to be sure is to have multiple hard drives.

I use 6 internals and 2 externals.

Windows and all my programs are installed on C:/ and all my stuff is everywhere else. But safe none the less.

Remember your C:/ drive gets the most wear and tear since it host your OS. So multi partition is really useless.

I don't agree that as multi-partition is useless with one drive. I do agree that separate drives are better for the reason you mentioned. But even with one drive, if your OS is in one partition and your data is in another and your OS tanks, it is easy to restore/reinstall the system without messing up your data.

I would just pull the drive and slave it to another system or USB it and pull the files. Then reinstall the OS after that.

Multi partitions are a false sense of security that has cost many business a large sum of revenue.

If you need good backup use a spaerate drive, DVDs, Iomega whatever but muliti partitions are for multi OSes.

CarlTR6 said:

joel406 said:

If you only have one hard drive it really dosent matter how many partitions you have. If the drive dies it all dies.

The only way to be sure is to have multiple hard drives.

I use 6 internals and 2 externals.

Windows and all my programs are installed on C:/ and all my stuff is everywhere else. But safe none the less.

Remember your C:/ drive gets the most wear and tear since it host your OS. So multi partition is really useless.

I don't agree that as multi-partition is useless with one drive. I do agree that separate drives are better for the reason you mentioned. But even with one drive, if your OS is in one partition and your data is in another and your OS tanks, it is easy to restore/reinstall the system without messing up your data.

I am going to partially agree with both of you here.

Joel has a very good point that your data on a SINGLE HDD is much more likely to be lost in the event of a drive failure. However, there are ways to recover data from a dead HDD, they are just not 100% reliable.
You say that if the C:/ crashes, then you can reformat and save the data, maybe. It would depend on what you use.

In general (as you said Carl) it would be SAFER to have it on a different drive.

For your purpose, SPACE WISE a second whole drive/partition is not needed. To keep them safe however, it is a GREAT IDEA.

~Lordbob

cycleback said:

I plan on having a second drive for backups. My main thoughts about partitioning the system drive is for ease of restores incase of virus/malware problems. My only concern about partitioning the system drive into OS/Programs and Documents is a potential for a speed hit.

I don't think there would be a big difference to be honest.

~Lordbob

Here is what I do on desktop workstations only (Totally different on Servers):

C: 100GB -
----------|-- 1TB Drive with 2 Partitions
D: 900GB -

R: --- 1TB External Drive 1 Partition.

C: = OS and Software
D: = Data, Documents and anything non-OS related.
R: = Back ups, Images, and all D: Data.

If the C: Drive completely fails I have a backup on R: with an Image as well as the D: Data
If the D: Partition fails I have the backup on R: with all Data
If the C: Partition fails I have an Image on R:
If the R: Drive fails, I buy a new drive and transfer to the new R:

(Note the images/backups are on the D: drive as well for backups of backups)

This is about as safe as you can get with only 2 drives.

The speed will be fine.