What is the reason for you to have 6+ partitions?
organizational purposes, of course. You can't keep Windows + Business + Games + Backups on the same partition...
And it won't be 6+ partitions, it will be 3+ partitions because - like I said - I will be buying 2 SSDs, not just 1. And 1 of them will be exclusively for Windows, the other one exclusively for Linux (I intend to dual-boot in Linux / Windows).
One thing where a separate partition makes sense is OS partition.
Then you can easily perform operations with OS partition (without affecting your other data)
back it up/create image,restore from backup,format and reinstall OS.
hence why partitioning is needed
To save SSD writes, you can make separate partitions on mechanical HDDs for
swap file,user temp file area,web browser cache area.
wait! Doesn't the swap file (I'm assuming you're referring to Linux, because I don't think that Windows creates swap files, does it??) need to be on the fastest drive possible so that the contents of that file can be accessed fast? For the Linux SSD I was going to put the swap file onto its own partition on the PCIe Gen4 SSD (the PCIe Gen 3 SSD will be used for Windows + games + business stuff)
The reasons are essentially the same as they would be for a traditional spinning hard drive.
I mean, that's what I thought too. After all, that's why I'll be creating partitions and AFAIK partitioned HDDs don't create problems... at least I've not had a single one of them in over 30 years of using mechanical drives (lucky me, I know
)
Multiple partitions can prove to be inefficient in that you cannot accurately anticipate the growth rate of the files contained in the partition.
that may be so for most people. But I rarely do unpredictable stuff (not just on PC, but in life, too). I am a conservationist by nature, when I like something I usually stick with it my entire life. I've rarely played new games, for example (although I am a gamer), and only several years after their release.
Anyway, I'm getting into too many useless details. The point is that I usually know what I need and how big the partitions need to be (and I even make them 3-4x bigger than I need anyway, for Windows for example I always allocate 100-150 GB of space, even though I know very well that it usually needs about 30-40 GB to function flawlessly), and I've never ever EVER run into storage issues. So no, they're not inefficient for me
One or another of them will likely fill up faster than you thought, throwing off the calculations you have sweated over.
nope, not for me. Believe me! And in all honesty, if one of the partitions will fill up it will always be a meaningless one (porn or games), which I can manage easily by simply moving files from one partition to another. But this almost never happens for me like I said, I always plan my partitions perfectly because I know what I do with my computer.... and it's always the same thing.
If you split up a 500 gb drive into say 100 for pictures, 100 for mp3s, and 300 for video files.....you could easily find yourself in a situation later on where the mp3 partition is nearly full.
nope! Once again, this doesn't apply to me
All of these things that you've mentioned have always gone into the MEDIA partition for me, and since I don't usually download images or mp3s (I've been listening to the same 70s-80s-90s music for over 30 years, I almost never download modern
garbage music, so I have no reason to fill up / expand the MEDIA partition) I have no reason to panic about this partition filling up.
You may have plenty of space on the other 2, but you'd then be forced to mix your mp3s in with pictures or video files.
The partition called MEDIA is organized into folders (music, images, videoclips, movies, cartoons, etc). So, I never mix anything up.
Believe it or not, I really do appreciate you trying to help, and what you're saying is true for most people. But I am not "most people", I am unique in this regard... or at least less common if not unique, I'm pretty sure there are other people like me out there, it's just that it's not a lot of us probably...
But yeah, what you're saying makes sense and I'm pretty sure that it applies to many folks, just not to me
If you had a single partition of 500 subdivided by folders for pictures, mp3s and video files, that problem would not have occurred. The entire drive would be available for any file. All subdivision would be by folders not partitions.
yep, that's how I do it...
But I do really need to split up my work, leisure and OS into different partitions for safety if not for any other reason, hence why the need for 3+ partitions.
If you are building new, it can make sense to put Windows and applications on one SSD and data on another, but subdividing into partitions on a single drive can eventually lead to issues.
when you say "data" are you referring to storage (music, movies, images, etc.), or is this something else? And yes, the applications will go on the same SSD for sure, I did take this into account
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram