Does it make sense for a separate documents partition?

[cycleback]

I am setting up my new computer this weekend with Windows 7. In my old machine I had a small drive for the OS and Programs and placed all my files on a separate drive. I could then very quickly make backup images of the OS drive using Acronis. For my new install I have a 1 Tb drive and I am trying to figure out how to do backups quickly. Does it still make sense to create a separate partition for my documents in Windows 7? How does one move the user profile to do this in Windows 7. I like to use imaging for backups but it seems like like it will be very slow on the full 1 Tb drive even with incremental images. What is the recommended technique for backing up in Windows 7 in case I get some virus or malware?

 

[joel406]

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.

 

[CarlTR6]

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.

 

[joel406]

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.

 

[Lordbob75]

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]

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.

 

[Lordbob75]

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

 

[WindowsStar]

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.

 

[cycleback]

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.

This is what I thought about doing but I am concerned with the speed hit to hard drive seeks when I partition the drive.

 

[WindowsStar]

The speed will be fine.

 

[CarlTR6]

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.

It should not affect your speed. You are still using the same drive.

 

[bigmck]

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.

Why do you have the programs with the OS? It would seem that if the programs were with their related files, it would be more efficient. Thanks,

 

[WindowsStar]

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.

Why do you have the programs with the OS? It would seem that if the programs were with their related files, it would be more efficient. Thanks,

Simple answer: Mostly because Microsoft set it up that way and most software tries to install that way. I have installed many software in other places and many work fine but others have hardcoded parts and look for the Microsoft install place and don't work.

 

[harpua]

Also, even if using only one drive for the OS/APPs and Data, it's still nice to have the OS/APPs in a separate partition from the Data because aside from the advantages when restoring, it also provides a lot more flexibility because it allows you to back up the two partitions separately, perhaps on different schedules (if that is appropriate). Also because the two partitions will each be smaller than one big combination OS/APP/Data partition would be, this makes it possible to back up to smaller sized possibly less expensive or free backup media which one might have lying around perhaps cannibalized from previous systems. An inexpensive hard drive dock is a useful accessory that makes this very easy, (and fast if a firewire or esata port is available and one gets a dock that supports one or more of those connections).

 

[Lordbob75]

The one issue that is rather irritating with 2 partitions, is that whenever you install things you have to reset the directory and disc, which is annoying.

Anyone know a fix for this?

~Lordbob

 

[cycleback]

It should not affect your speed. You are still using the same drive.

I think there will be a speed hit for seeks. If you are accessing a data file on D: and a system call to the OS or Swap is on C: then the head needs to travel across quite a bit of the disk. The seeks should increase because the files are not packed as closely. This is what I am concerned about.

 

[Lordbob75]

It should not affect your speed. You are still using the same drive.

I think there will be a speed hit for seeks. If you are accessing a data file on D: and a system call to the OS or Swap is on C: then the head needs to travel across quite a bit of the disk. The seeks should increase because the files are not packed as closely. This is what I am concerned about.

There will not be an issue. As long as you are not REALLY fragmented, the head moves fast enough that moving from partition to partition is not a big deal. Though if it is on a second disk, then there would be NO difference, because it is a different HDD.

You would only encounter this problem if there was lots of data scattered all over the drive (middle, outside, inside) and it needed to access different ones of those where it was moving in and out, in and out, in and out. That is what the defragger is for.

~Lordbob

 

[CarlTR6]

There is not much travel with today's hard drives and it is quick. There should be little or no more travel than if you had the OS, programs and data on one partition. The system call is more than likely taking place in RAM. The data has to be accessed from the hard drive anyway in either case - and it is on the same physical drive in both cases.

As Lordbob said, if the disk is really fragmented, you will take a small hit; but that would be the case if your were fragmented with only one partition.