Solved Should I split my 256GB SSD into 2 partitions; One for VHDs?

[TanyaC]

I'm using an OCZ Vertex 4 that I partitioned as a single drive. I bought it because I started learning about VM's. I have a separate test machine downstairs but I thought I'd set up a VM for WIndows 8 (Since it is unlikely I will ever use it as my primary OS), and for Ubuntu and Windows XP. Mostly just for the learning experience.

I create an image of my C: drive for recovery using Macrium. Which is now huge because of the VHD files.

So; Do you think it is worthwhile splitting the 256GB into two partitions so I have a purely OS/Applications drive, and one for my VMs, or just leave it as is. What do you guys do?

Reading the support forum for Macrium, it appears you can't exclude user defined files from a disk image?

 

[F5ing]

I typically do that for all machines (mine, anyway). OS/apps get imaged, other data gets backed up (as necessary) via other means.

About the only thing I've seen with imaging apps, as far as individual file exclusions are concerned, is the ability to exclude the paging and hibernation files. Beyond that, you're going to be imaging either an entire partition or an entire disk.

 

[TanyaC]

Yes, my data is on a couple of spinners.

I was more wondering about partitioning the SSD. I started with a 120gb which I didn't need to partition, but with a 256GB, I don't need such a big system/app partition.

Just thought I'd check just incase there were any 4k boundary issues, or starting at the correct sector doesn't change with partitioning SSDs

 

[F5ing]

You may have already checked these out, but I'll list them anyway:

http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/75127-partition-image-restore-hdd-ssd.html

http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/113967-ssd-alignment.html

http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/70822-ssd-tweaks-optimizations-windows-7-a.html

 

[TanyaC]

Yes, I had read those before posting. Thanks for providing links.

I currently do not have a recovery partition. When I installed windows on this disk windows created only one partition, at offset 1024, of approximately 238gb.

I can manually do this via diskpart as the second tutorial shows. If I do this manually, and I create 100mb partition will windows automatically use it for the recovery partition?

When I was playing with my 120gb drive it didn't appear to use it, as it was 0% used after windows was installed. So I "cleaned" the disk and let Windows install do what it wanted, which was to not create the recovery partition at all. The same for the 256gb drive.

Hence my query.

Someone stated in a previous post that if the 100mb partition is aligned then the next partition will also be aligned. I am talking about 3 partitions total; 100mb, 80gb and the rest of the 256gb drive.

Since any number * 1024 will always be divisible by 4 then I guess I'm ok.

Right!?

 

[F5ing]

If the disk was completely blank when you did the install I would expect that w7 would've created the "System Reserved" partition and then use it for booting.

Is that what you're referring to when you mention "recovery partition"?

See here for info on when it decides to create that partition on an install:

• If you want to have the 100 MB System Reserved partition in addition to the Windows 7 C: partition on a HDD or SSD after installation, then you would need to make sure that all partitions on the drive have been deleted until it is only unallocated space. Next, select the unallocated drive to install Windows 7 on. If there are no partitions on the disk, you will get the 100 MB System Reserved.
• If you do not want to have the 100 MB System Reserved partition and only the Windows 7 C: partition on a HDD or SSD after installation, then select a formatted partition or drive to install Windows 7 on. If there are any partitions on the disk, you won't get the 100 MB System Reserved.

The above quote is from this tutorial: http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/1649-clean-install-windows-7-a.html

As far as the alignment is concerned, and your first partition is correctly aligned, I think if you create/modify new partitions with software that maintains alignment by default then you'll be okay. Just don't force it to your numbers. Keep in mind that I know almost nothing about SSDs, where alignment is apparently even more critical than with spinners.

 

[smarteyeball]

Stick with the the one partition. It's the same drive, so it's not going to net you any perceptible difference.

 

[F5ing]

True enough. Why not just store the stuff you don't want to include in your images somewhere else?

 

[TanyaC]

Stick with the the one partition. It's the same drive, so it's not going to net you any perceptible difference.

Not sure what you mean.

I was contemplating splitting the drive because I have now got several VMs, and they are on the SSD. I image the drive about once a month and I don't want to include the VHDs in the image, so I was going to move them to a separate partition.

 

[TanyaC]

True enough. Why not just store the stuff you don't want to include in your images somewhere else?

Exactly; on a second partition on an SSD.

Isn't there a performance gain to be realised with VMs on the SSD, as opposed to on the spinners?

Or is that what is meant by "no perceptible difference"?

 

[smarteyeball]

Not sure what you mean.

I was contemplating splitting the drive because I have now got several VMs, and they are on the SSD. I image the drive about once a month and I don't want to include the VHDs in the image, so I was going to move them to a separate partition.

Ahh, caught out skimming - didn't notice that pertinent part

In that case, splitting the partition is definitely the best way to go given your requirements.

Like pretty much everything else, VM's do benefit from SSD's. There is a noticeable difference when running a VM on a single spinner. Biggest noticeable impact is on load times basically. Starting/restoring is a lot quicker on SSD or RAID than a single spinner. Actual OS operation is fine though.

A good compromise could to be to set up a spinner RAID 0 to run your VM'S off and to also purchase and an external hdd to save all your backups to. USB 3.0 preferably if you have it. If not, there are add in USB 3.0 cards.

RAID 5 would also give you a speed benefit but requires extra hdd's - ie you'd need 4 drives for a 'two drive' RAID.

 

[jimbo45]

Hi there
I'd suggest another alternative

Install a USB3 card (can easily be done on modern MOBO) and install the VM on a USB3 drive -- that way you don't get excessive READ / WRITE cycles on SSD for the VM and the speed of USB3 will certainly be more than adequate for most VM's.

An external USB3 drive might even have better performance than an internal e-sata drive anyway.

(Note use a dedicated USB3 drive - not one that can also operate in USB2 compatibility mode).

I really wouldn't put any VM's on the same SSD as the HOST OS (now if you had a second SSD --another issue !!!).

Cheers
jimbo

 

[TanyaC]

lol. A little too late.

I just finished rebuilding the system. I had the 256gb installed already, but I had the VMs on the single partition. The reason I split it was that I image the system with Macrium regularly, and you can't exclude individual files with the image.

Your solution would have achieved the same thing I guess.

I do have my old 120gb SSD around somewhere. It seems a waste though having a 256gb OS/Apps partition. I had 198GB free after everything was installed (without the VMs), and 107gb with all the VMs on the partition.