by msgale - 9/4/11 8:18 PM
In Reply to: Partitioning by dangnad1
The one reason not to partition is because it is very hard to get correct. Using one of my systems as an example. My directories are as follows
1. windows (40 gigabytes),
2. program files (10 gigabytes),
3. program files (x86) (50 gigabytes),
4. the hidden directory programdata (10 gigabytes)
This means that the minimum size of the "C" partition is more like 120 gigabytes rather the 80 gigabytes as suggested. The directory "c:\users\" contains part of the registry in the hidden file "c\users\\ntuser.dat" which means moving the default locations correctly is not that simple.
Moving the swap file to another partition is useless, since there is but one disk positioner per drive, therefore a disk seek on one partition, will interfere with a seek on another partition on the same disk. There will be some performance increase if swap is on a different disk. However with the large memories of today swapping has become less of a performance issue.
Back in the Stone Age, I was a UNIX system administrator. At that time a one gigabyte disk was very large we had five. Almost every week I had to repartition and reassign the disks because of capacity issues. I was running the disks between 90 and 105 percent full. Therefore I do have partitioning experience.
Was this reply helpful? (0) (0)