Win2K: Dynamic vs Partition

[SiberianTiger]

My question is which is better?

I have always partitioned my drives. Now I noticed that I can create multiple volumes on a dynamic drive. Are there any serious pros and cons for either one?

The only thing I noticed about dynamic drives is that they are not usable for portables and cannot be browsed in MSDOS.

So what do you recommend?

 

[jsm]

I like dynamic volumes better. You can make sw RAIDs using it.

 

[Strafe]

If the drive is not going to be part of a RAID array, there is no reason to change to a dynamic disc. A dynamic disc keeps info about all drives in an array on each drive.

 

[SUOrangeman]

If you ever remove a disk from a dynamic volume, it won't work in another as-is, right?

-SUO

 

[Strafe]

Actually SU, I think it will. I had 1 drive as my boot drive and 2 dynamic drives software raid 0 as my data drive. I reformatted and reinstalled win2k on the boot drive. The data drive wasnt immediately accessible but when I went into the drive config app I was able to 'import a foreign volume'. Of course dynamic drives are only accessible in windows 2000.

 

[SUOrangeman]

Hadn't thought about it that way, Strafe. But, it sounds like it works (in Win2K, at least). I'm almost tempted to try it with something.

-SUO