Partitioning, Formatting, and Swap File

[WaxHaX0rS]

The parts for my new system are coming soon, and I want to know how I'm going to partition the HD before hand. It is a 160GB Seagate SATAII hard drive. I would ideally like to have one huge partition to prevent from wasting space, but that might not be good for other things. For example, it may be a pain to reformat, as I would lose all of my storage files if I just wanted to reinstall the OS. So I'm thinking maybe have a few GB for the OS and the rest for storage or installations? Or maybe a couple of gigs for the OS, and have the rest divided into two equal parts: one for installlations and one for storage? I've also read about people having a partition just for their "swap file". I'm not sure what the swap file is, but what is the advantage to doing this, and how big should the partition be? Also, is there a program where I can install the OS and the basics on the formatted harddrive, and THEN add partitions and remove partitions without reformatting the HD and to have the ability to format each drive individually? Lastly, what advantages are there of NTFS over FAT32 or vice versa? I've always done FAT32 just in the unlikely case for whatever reason, I can't get Win2k to work or it gets screwed up and then I have to install Win98. But if NTFS is significantly better, I may end this trend of using FAT32.

 

[KoolDrew]

It is best to keep all installations on the drive with the OS. So it is best to create one large NTFS partition, but having a separate partition for MP3's etc. is not a bad idea, but do not use it as a substitute for regular backups of important data. That should be backed up on a CD or DVD not on a separate partition.

Also having the paging file on a separate partition then the Os, but on the same drive is stupid. All it will do is slow performance as performance is better at the outer edge of the drive. Don't mess with the paging file.

You can add/remove partition within Windows by go to

Start > Settings > Control Panel > Administrive Tools > Computer Management > Disk Management

You can right click unallocated space and create a new p[partition or delete one. The only thing that sucks about the Disk management utility as it does not allow you to resize the partition. The best program is Partition Magic but it is not free. I use it though. However there are a few free programs out there that allow you to resize it such as QTparted and ntfsresize.

Also Don't even consider FAT32. NTFS will be much faster on larger drives as NTFS's MFT handles larger files much better then FAT's File Allocation Table. The only advantage FAT32 has over NTFS is it is a simple file system so more tools understand it. Besides that is should not be used on a system with just A Windows OS that supports NTFS.

Hope that helped!

 

[n0cmonkey]

One partition is fine, just backup. It's something you should be doing anyhow. DVD burners are cheap, and can hold 4-8GB easily. This protects you if the drive goes too, and trust me that can be important.

If you really want to partition, give yourself 10-15GB for Windows. You won't use that space, since you'll be installing programs to another partition, but it's nice to have.

Forget about the swap file. Windows knows how to manage it, and putting it in a seperate partition won't really give you any benefit.

There's a FAQ on the differences between NTFS and FAT32, but there really is no reason what so ever to use FAT32 on non-removable storage.

 

[WaxHaX0rS]

Thanks very much for the info, very helpful. I think I'll just stick with one big partition and buy a lot of DVD-R's.

 

[ColKurtz]

Just my .02...

I prefer to keep the OS isolated as much as possible. Though I keep many of my programs in the default C:\program files folder, I keep as much data as possible on D: (second partition on first hdd). It just makes it a lot easier if I have to reinstall my OS. Some OS problems aren't fixed by repair installs - if you've never had to FFR, consider yourself lucky.

This is really just a "religious argument". Some prefer the ease of managing and backing up just one partition, others plan for the worst-case scenario. I would guess that many who work in support lean towards seperate partition b/c, 1) servers usually isolate data from the OS (for better reasons), and 2) we hear a disproportionate amount of disasters (no one ever calls to say "things are running GREAT!") and are more paranoid than the average person.

 

[dunkster]

I'm an advocate of multiple partitions.

The only two partitions that I consider critical are SYSTEM (Windows and most-critical apps) and DATA. Both of those partitions are imaged weekly to DVD media.

I consider it critical to isolate Windows from Data. If you're forced to re-install Windows, you don't lose valuable data. All apps (Word, Excel, etc.), are configured to save files to the DATA partition. All photos, personal information, backup copies of critical drivers. etc. go here.

Games go to a separate partition. I have the CDs, so re-installation is trivial.

I also use an APPS partition for trial software and non-critical apps. Since they're non-critical, re-installation is trivial - and it helps me keep a lean SYSTEM partition that I can image to a single DVD.

If your backup strategy includes storing backup images to your HD, they should definitely have their own partition.

Any 'one large partition' system is at the mercy of a single critical crash of Windows, HD failure or severe malware attack. It ONLY MAKES SENSE if you regularly image the entire contents of the HD on a regular basis to recovery device or media other than the source HD.

Hope this helps!

 

[Nothinman]

Games go to a separate partition. I have the CDs, so re-installation is trivial.

I also use an APPS partition for trial software and non-critical apps. Since they're non-critical, re-installation is trivial - and it helps me keep a lean SYSTEM partition that I can image to a single DVD.

And what happens when one of those partitions runs out of space? Why is seperating them via partiitons better than directories?

Any 'one large partition' system is at the mercy of a single critical crash of Windows, HD failure or severe malware attack

Multiple partitons won't stop any of that. It will help in the case of a hard disk failure, but the data disk has just as much a chance of dying as the system disk.

 

[KoolDrew]

Games go to a separate partition. I have the CDs, so re-installation is trivial.

I also use an APPS partition for trial software and non-critical apps. Since they're non-critical, re-installation is trivial - and it helps me keep a lean SYSTEM partition that I can image to a single DVD.

If you need to reformat then you will need to reinstall those games and apps anyway so I don't see the benefit of having games or apps on a partition other then the one with Windows on it. And as Nothinman pointed out it is more of a hassle because of resizing the partition. Resizing a partition doesn't always work. I have used Partition Magic plenty of times and I have lost all my data once. The only reason IMO to have a separate partition on a system with one OS is for storage like MP3's and any other important stuff, but as I already said that is no substitute for backing up your valuable data onto a DVD.

I myself do have a separate partition just for music and any other important stuff that when I reformat I don't really want to lose, but the stuff that is really important to me is backed up on a DVD.

 

[Nothinman]

If you need to reformat then you will need to reinstall those games and apps anyway so I don't see the benefit of having games or apps on a partition other then the one with Windows on it

Not necessarily true, I used to have a whole host of games and apps that worked just fine without installation. Some of them required some registry keys to work, but it's easy to save a .reg file in the same directory to import after a new install. But even so, it's largely pointless to segregate everything with it's own partition.

 

[Dragonbate]

Another vote for partitioning here. Its been my experience that windows installations die much more frequently than any real hard drive problems. Having the OS isolated on one partition makes formatting and reinstalling relatively painless. There are supposedly some benefits to having the swap partition on a partition on a seperate hard drive but not on the same drive. I generally keep apps on a seperate partition to keep my windows partition minimal (about 8 gigs) but they could just as easily be put on the windows partition.

 

[CQuinn]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

And what happens when one of those partitions runs out of space? Why is seperating them via partiitons better than directories? [q/]

You can try to plan ahead, and allocate enough space for the partition to grow into without using
up all its available space. On the secondary, you may want to have a set limit in mind for the
growth of a certain group of files (video capture files for instance) before you are forced to back
them up, and/or delete files that are no longer needed to reclaim the space.

With a modern enough file system, you can also mount separate partitions as folders.

Any 'one large partition' system is at the mercy of a single critical crash of Windows, HD failure or severe malware attack

Multiple partitons won't stop any of that. It will help in the case of a hard disk failure, but the data disk has just as much a chance of dying as the system disk.

I've had MFT corruption twice on the same drive within the past 12 months. The first instance was on
a very large partition. The second time I split the large partition into three smaller ones, and the
corruption only seems to be appearing on the end partition of the set, which was created with a large
cluster allocation that may have been a factor in the current problems I'm seeing.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: CQuinn
I've had MFT corruption twice on the same drive within the past 12 months. The first instance was on
a very large partition. The second time I split the large partition into three smaller ones, and the
corruption only seems to be appearing on the end partition of the set, which was created with a large
cluster allocation that may have been a factor in the current problems I'm seeing.

Maybe you should start looking for the root of the problem...

 

[Nothinman]

You can try to plan ahead, and allocate enough space for the partition to grow into without using
up all its available space.

Or you can avoid the extra calculations and make one big partiton, directories grow a lot easier than partitions.

On the secondary, you may want to have a set limit in mind for the
growth of a certain group of files (video capture files for instance) before you are forced to back
them up, and/or delete files that are no longer needed to reclaim the space.

He specifically said games and apps, not many people remove old games when they install a new one unless they're forced to.

With a modern enough file system, you can also mount separate partitions as folders.

The filesystem is irrelevant, MS put artificial limits (or maybe just stupid accidental restrictions) in NT to make it so you can only mount filesystems to directories because I can do that with VFAT on Linux no problem.

I've had MFT corruption twice on the same drive within the past 12 months.

And the size of the volume would matter how in that situation?

The second time I split the large partition into three smaller ones, and the
corruption only seems to be appearing on the end partition of the set, which was created with a large
cluster allocation that may have been a factor in the current problems I'm seeing.

Or you've got a dying drive or a funky cable, both of which are a lot more likely than an NTFS bug.