[SOLVED] Drive Partition Strategies

[dereckbc]

Just built a new machine with a SSD and reusing my 2Tb HDD. Last night I made one 500 Gb Partition, so not too late to change directions. Initial thought before I learned limitations was 5 Partitions using them like root file folders; Documents, Media, Personal, Work, and Downloads. What I quickly learned you can only have 3 Primary and 1 Extended Partitions with as many virtual Drives you want. I do not fully understand the pros and cons of the limitations.

So what are the strategies for Partitioning a HDD? Additionally the pros and cons.

Thank you in advance.

 

[ex_bubblehead]

....So what are the strategies for Partitioning a HDD? Additionally the pros and cons....

Partitions are a leftover from a bygone era. Single partition only these days. Use folders to separate things.

If you use partitions as you indicated, what happens when one of them fills up, while there is plenty of room in the others?

 

[USAFRet]

What size is the SSD?
Please show us a screencap of the Disk Management window.

Partitions on a drive is not nearly as useful as it used to be.

On an HDD, the outermost 'partition' (to the left in Disk Management) the data is accessed fasted, because the data is going past the head faster.

But, its not really that big a difference.

And with individual partitions, one or the other will invariably end up being Too Small.
If, for instance, you had 50GB free in the "media" partition, but you needed to store 60GB of data in there....you can't.
Even though there might be 150GB free elsewhere on that physical drive.

Just leave it as top level folders, no individual partitions.

 

[SkyNetRising]

Partitions have their use. Probably not much for average user though.

For example -

each OS needs a separate partition,​

swap can be placed on a separate partition, then each OS can use common swap partition and not waste swap space.​

user files can be placed on a separate partition, then OS partition format/reinstall doesn't cause loss of user data.​

browser cache and temp folders can be relocated to a separate partition on HDD to save SSD write cycles.​

​

Lots of other situations, when partitions can be useful.

 

[dereckbc]

What size is the SSD?
Please show us a screencap of the Disk Management window.

Disk 1 = SSD = 1Tb

 

[USAFRet]

Disk 1 = SSD = 1Tb

Personally, I'd just leave the 2TB as a single partition.
Top level folders to delineate data in their own buckets.

If there were operational needs (as mentioned above), then maybe partitions.
Multiple OS's, Linux swap files, stuff like that.

For just data on the HDD?
Leave it as one.

 

[dereckbc]

Personally, I'd just leave the 2TB as a single partition.
Top level folders to delineate data in their own buckets.

Essentially that is what did. Something you said earlier caught my attention. Partitions on the left side are the outer most of the disk. In 6 years only accumulated just under 80 Gb. So I just left the 500G Partition in and left 1.5T unallocated.

THX

 

[USAFRet]

Essentially that is what did. Something you said earlier caught my attention. Partitions on the left side are the outer most of the disk. In 6 years only accumulated just under 80 Gb. So I just left the 500G Partition in and left 1.5T unallocated.

THX

Thereby tossing out 75% of your drive space.

 

[Endre]

The way I’d do it:

I’d partition the SSD, making 2 partitions:
•1st partition: 250GB (aka Local Disk C - for the OS);
•2nd partition: The remaining free space left on the SSD (aka Local Disk D - for personal files);

•I’d create a full sized 2TB partition out of the HDD (aka Local Disk E - for personal files).

The advantage of having the OS on a separate partition is that if you get into troubles and need to format the OS partition and re-install Windows clean, you won’t lose your personal files located on the drive.

 

[lvt]

So you have 500GB SSD + 1TB HDD, I'd suggest that you have a cloned system so when your boot drive fails you can have your system back and running by simply switching the boot drive's order.

The SSD should be partitioned to 2 partitions

C:\WINDOWS_OS (250GB)
D:\DATA (250GB)

The HDD can be partitioned to at least 3 partitions

E:\WINDOWS_OS (250GB)
F:\WORK (250GB)
G:\PERSONAL(250GB)
H:\MOVIES (250GB)

The C drive and E drive sizes are mandatory, they must have the same sizes so that the whole operating system can be transferred back and forth when needed. You can rename and adjust the sizes of other partitions at will.

 

[USAFRet]

So you have 500GB SSD + 1TB HDD, I'd suggest that you have a cloned system so when your boot drive fails you can have your system back and running by simply switching the boot drive's order.

The SSD should be partitioned to 2 partitions

C:\WINDOWS_OS (250GB)
D:\DATA (250GB)

The HDD can be partitioned to at least 3 partitions

E:\WINDOWS_OS (250GB)
F:\WORK (250GB)
G:\PERSONAL(250GB)
H:\MOVIES (250GB)

The C drive and E drive sizes are mandatory, they must have the same sizes so that the whole operating system can be transferred back and forth when needed. You can rename and adjust the sizes of other partitions at will.

A C drive, and a clone of the C (the E?) in the same system, is worse than useless.
Seen problems with config that far too may times.

There are much much better ways to protect things.

Splitting a 500GB drive in 2?
Not even.


Sorry, cannot agree with this config in the slightest.

 

[lvt]

A C drive, and a clone of the C (the E?) in the same system, is worse than useless.
Seen problems with config that far too may times.

Yes, I always have a cloned system in other disk, and it already saved me a couple of times when the system crashed.

What kind of problem do you see?

Splitting a 500GB drive in 2?
Not even.

Why not? What prevents you from doing so?

Sorry, cannot agree with this config in the slightest.

Whatever config you may propose, it will be more or less identical.

 

[dereckbc]

Thereby tossing out 75% of your drive space.

RUA. Perhaps laziness on my part. Not too late to change directions. Got lazy thinking since in 6 to 8 years only accumulated around 90Gb, then 500 Gb should last the life of the machine, especially since I retired and do not need it for work any more. Point taken, sigh, now I gotta back it up again, format the whole drive, and load it back up again.

THX

 

[USAFRet]

Yes, I always have a cloned system in other disk, and it already saved me a couple of times when the system crashed.

What kind of problem do you see?

2 fully bootable mostly identical OS, in the same system.
Without wanting a dualboot situation.

User powers up the system, it looks exactly like it did 6 months ago.
WHAT?
All recent work, gone.
At first, he thought a virus/malware.
Second, a haywire Windows update.

No...it was just a SATA data cable that went bad.
He had cloned from HDD to SSD 6 months ago, and forgot about the OS on the HDD.
SATA cable goes bad, the system skips over that SSD and drops down to the next entry, the old HDD.

Took us 3 days to figure it out.

Not the only one I've seen like that.

Backups are great. Everyone should do more of that.
But a fully bootable clone...not so much.

A clone is good for moving to a new drive right now.
Backup and data security is something else.

My systems get nightly or weekly full drive Images. Easily recoverable.

What is your backup situation at home?

What is your backup situation at home? And if you don't do that, why not? Every single day, I read multiple threads here of "How do I get my stuff back?" or "That drive had 5 years of photos of my kids!!" Be it a dead drive, dropped phone, virus, accidental deletion, formatting the wrong...

forums.tomshardware.com

 

[USAFRet]

Why not? What prevents you from doing so?

Nothing "prevents".

But why? What benefit?

 

[dereckbc]

I’d partition the SSD, making 2 partitions:
•1st partition: 250GB (aka Local Disk C - for the OS);
•2nd partition: The remaining free space left on the SSD (aka Local Disk D - for personal files);

If you look, that is what happened by accident, I let Windows do it. It left 93 Gb unallocated I could claim. Not sure what advantage it would be? I do not want to use the SSD for any storage other than application software. If I partitioned the unallocated space would not be used for anything. I must be missing something.

•I’d create a full sized 2TB partition out of the HDD (aka Local Disk E - for personal files).

Heading that way and was the plan from the start. Use the SSD for OS and applications only. Only allocated 500 first time uhg!.

Thanks for the comments.

 

[USAFRet]

If you look, that is what happened by accident, I let Windows do it. It left 93 Gb unallocated I could claim. Not sure what advantage it would be? I do not want to use the SSD for any storage other than application software. If I partitioned the unallocated space would not be used for anything. I must be missing something.

Heading that way and was the plan from the start. Use the SSD for OS and applications only. Only allocated 500 first time uhg!.

Thanks for the comments.

A fresh OS install should not have left that space Unallocated.
Personally, I would extend that C partition to the right, and have that space available.

 

[dereckbc]

So you have 500GB SSD + 1TB HDD

SSD = 1 TB
HDD = 2 TB

Scroll up and you can see the allocation.

The SSD should be partitioned to 2 partitions

C:\WINDOWS_OS (250GB)
D:\DATA (250GB)

Afraid a bit too late for that now. Took what windows gave me. l already have all my apps loaded and the system running fine. Curious though how do you tell Windows to share between C:\ and D:\ drives?

THX

 

[USAFRet]

Curious though how do you tell Windows to share between C:\ and D:\ drives?

Windows and applications have gotten really good at utilizing multiple drives and drive letters.

Save something to the D drive, and the next time you use that application, it will default to that same drive and folder as a save space for the next file.

In my system, multiple physical drives (see the sig line below). Each with their own main purpose.

Photos on the H, CAD/3D printer stuff on the E, Games on the I, etc, etc.
OS and applications on the C.

 

[lvt]

SSD = 1 TB
HDD = 2 TB

Scroll up and you can see the allocation.

Afraid a bit too late for that now. Took what windows gave me. l already have all my apps loaded and the system running fine. Curious though how do you tell Windows to share between C:\ and D:\ drives?

THX

No worries, regardless what SSD size you may have, the boot drive would be set to 250GB. Of course you could just use the entire SSD drive, but most of clone and backup apps might require the other partition to be of the same size, so 250GB is reasonable. You won't waste the space on other drive.

 

[USAFRet]

but most of clone and backup apps might require the other partition to be of the same size

Actually, no.
Recent tools only care about the consumed space.

My current C drive is a 500GB 850 EVO.
If it were only 200GB consumed, Macrium Reflect would happily clone that to a 250GB drive.
Yes, I've done this.
Other current tools do the same.

A current Image of my C in Macrium is 301GB. From that 500GB drive. Consumed space, not the whole drive or partition.

Older tools like CloneZilla DO care about the drive or partition size.
Only clone to the same size or larger.

 

[lvt]

2 fully bootable mostly identical OS, in the same system.
Without wanting a dualboot situation.

Is wasn't about dual boot.

The cloned drive is exactly the same as the main boot drive, everything is the same, Windows, apps, databases...

As it's about a production machine, the downtime is not what we want. In case of boot drive failure (it did happen), we just use the cloned disk to continue our work and we would fix the faulty drive when time allows.

 

[USAFRet]

Is wasn't about dual boot.

The cloned drive is exactly the same as the main boot drive, everything is the same, Windows, apps, databases...

As it's about a production machine, the downtime is not what we want. In case of boot drive failure (it did happen), we just use the cloned disk to continue our work and we would fix the faulty drive when time allows.

In certain circumstances, sure.

In my own experience of recovering the Image of a dead 1TB drive...slot in a new drive, 90 minutes across the LAN.

If 90 minutes downtime is critical, then maybe a RAID 1 is the answer (accompanied by a regular backup routine)
A daily 'clone' would seem to be the worst of both worlds.

To each his own, I guess.

 

[lvt]

Actually, no.
Recent tools only care about the consumed space.

My current C drive is a 500GB 850 EVO.
If it were only 200GB consumed, Macrium Reflect would happily clone that to a 250GB drive.
Yes, I've done this.
Other current tools do the same.

A current Image of my C in Macrium is 301GB. From that 500GB drive. Consumed space, not the whole drive or partition.

Older tools like CloneZilla DO care about the drive or partition size.
Only clone to the same size or larger.

I know that Macrium can discard unnecessary data and compress data to create a smallest image possible. I currently use Macrium on Windows 10 and I like it.

But some of our machines are still running Windows XP on which we use EaseUS Backup & Clone. That software require two partitions to be identical.

 

[USAFRet]

I know that Macrium can discard unnecessary data and compress data to create a smallest image possible. I currently use Macrium on Windows 10 and I like it.

But some of our machines are still running Windows XP on which we use EaseUS Backup & Clone. That software require two partitions to be identical.

Requirements for specific tools used with a 20 year old OS do not necessarily mean it is a good configuration for every instance.

In your use case with XP in a work environment, sure specific partition sizes are required for that always available clone operation.
But if the OP is trying to use XP with his brand new system, there are much larger issues to contend with.