2 Windows 2K installs, 1 2003 Server and 1 XP...

[cuddles]

I guess this is the best place to post this. I'm not a total newb to computers by any means (running an FX-53 @ 2.64 stock HSF, x800 Pro VIVO -> XT @ 575 / 590, etc etc), but when it comes to specific things regarding Windows, I'm not so great. I can get myself around, but anything far beyond registry tweaking isn't something I'm great at.

So, how in the hell am I going to manage this? I figured I'd install 2K twice, then 2003, then XP. But I use dual Raptors for my drives and run Raid 0. My Raid 0 drivers that came with my mobo (S939 K8N Neo2) say 'WinXP Only' on them... so how am I going to manage this?

This is what I was thinking :

10GB C:\ - Windows XP

xxGB D:\ - Apps, Programs, Games, etc (for XP install only)

5GB E:\ - Windows 2000

5GB F:\ - Windows 2000

5GB G:\ - Windows 2003 Server

I'm just wondering how I'll get this all set up. Assuming I somehow learn to get my XP and 2K installs slipstreamed so that I can just install easily with all drivers included (still have to go through the trouble of figuring all that out) fully tweaked, what order do I install these OS's? How do I get my Raid drivers set up?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

(A quick side question (Which I can post another thread for if I need to) regarding paging files and such, how do I set all this up optimally? Paging on D? C? Share paging files on any specific partition?)

[jaclaz]

Cannot say anything about the driver, sorry.

A suggested setting (my two cents) is the following:

C: First Active Partition Primary FAT16 a little under 1 Gb

(I would recommend to install to C: a minimal system, either 2k or PE, for recovery purpose)

I am saying FAT16 as:

1) leaves the option (if ever needed) to access it easily with a normal dos/win9x bootdisk

2) partition table/bootsector can be easily managed with BOOTPART

3) in case of a "dumb" virus that wipes n initial sectors of the disk it's an additional safety measures

rest of the disk extended partition with volumes:

5GB D:\ - Windows 2000 1st instance NTFS

5GB E:\ - Windows 2000 2nd instance NTFS

5GB F:\ - Windows 2003 Server NTFS

xxGB G:\ Windows XP + Apps, Programs, Games, etc (for XP install only) NTFS

1 GB H:\ - Swap drive for ALL installs except the one on C:\ FAT32 (as it is slightly faster than NTFS and you won't need the additional features of NTFS for the swap file

jaclaz

[oioldman]

Have to agree with jaclaz on install.

But I would check on the M/B manufacturers site if you can get 2k or 2k3 drivers, because if not, your scuppered.

[cuddles]

C: First Active Partition Primary FAT16 a little under 1 Gb

(I would recommend to install to C: a minimal system, either 2k or PE, for recovery purpose)

I am saying FAT16 as:

1) leaves the option (if ever needed) to access it easily with a normal dos/win9x bootdisk

2) partition table/bootsector can be easily managed with BOOTPART

3) in case of a "dumb" virus that wipes n initial sectors of the disk it's an additional safety measures

rest of the disk extended partition with volumes:

5GB D:\ - Windows 2000 1st instance NTFS

5GB E:\ - Windows 2000 2nd instance NTFS

5GB F:\ - Windows 2003 Server NTFS

xxGB G:\ Windows XP + Apps, Programs, Games, etc (for XP install only) NTFS

1 GB H:\ - Swap drive for ALL installs except the one on C:\ FAT32 (as it is slightly faster than NTFS and you won't need the additional features of NTFS for the swap file

Ok, I'm not 100% clear on the actual purpose of the C:\.

Everything else makes sense to me, it sounds good. It sounds insane to me (I've only ever used one drive only, and just recently started using 2 partitions), but it sounds good.

Now I just have to find some way to hunt down 2K Raid drivers and get slipstreamed versions of each OS... this is going to take a while.

Thank you for the suggestion on the setup, that's what I'll use. Just not clear on the reason I'd have a C:\ under 1GB on FAT16. I'm one of those people who runs no AV, no FW software and never has a virus or any issues, so I never use any sort of recovery features.

Thanks for the help

[jaclaz]

I just had a look around, it seems like that MB has got Nvidia NFORCE3,

so that the place to look for is the NVIDIA site, not the MSI one.

Here is latest Win2k NFORCE driver:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/nforce_udp_win2k_4.27

WARNING:

Service Pack 3 (or later) is required to create a bootable RAID volume for a Windows 2000 environment.  A combination installation CD must be obtained/created before attempting to install the operating system onto the bootable RAID volume.

and here is the XP one:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/nforce_udp_winxp_5.10

WARNING:

Windows XP users must install Service Pack 1, at a minimum, prior to attempting to install this package. Failure to do so will result in the inability to support USB 2.0.

Finally, go here:

http://nvidia.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/nvidia....duser/entry.php

and search for "raid" to get to a related .pdf document.

jaclaz

[jaclaz]

It is optional, the fact is that should ( and I am not saying that it WILL happen, but trust me it COULD) your partition table or boot record get corrupted, to repair it will be easier if the First Active Partition is FAT16.

Same is why I suggested to put in there a minimal Win2k install.

I hinted a little less 1 Gb as it is a suitable size to be formatted as FAT16 without getting too big cluster sizes, but enough to install a Win2k, to use just in case of emergency.

Should the Registry, NTLDR, NTDETECT or whatever else in your "WORK" install go bad, it will be easier to make the system boot to this "recovery" install and use the latter to repair the broken install on the other partitions.

Of course you can build a BartPE bootcd and use it, but what if just that day you forgot the CD in your bag at home?

A dos boot diskette and a few utilities can be found akmost everywhere and in no time.

jaclaz

[cuddles]

Thanks man! I was just in the midst of searching the MSI forums for similar threads. I found a few, but none with solid answers, so you've helped a lot

So all I need now is to make my Win2K SPnothing install slipstreamed to a Win2K SP4 install and I'm set.

Do you recommend creating all those partitions in FDISK or using the Win2K install utility to set up partitions? I'm not sure that I have a bootdisk that'll let me get into FDISK anymore, since I've been on XP so long.

EDIT: Ahhh, alright. I may consider that then. I just realized that I also don't know how to set up all these OS's to be chosen at startup and how to install them all properly... I guess the order should be :

FDISK all partitions

2K < 1GB install on C:\

Both Win2K installs

2003

XP

Guess I'm off to find out how to get all of these to work together... this is turning out to be a huge chore.

[jaclaz]

Do you recommend creating all those partitions in FDISK or using the Win2K install utility to set up partitions? I'm not sure that I have a bootdisk that'll let me get into FDISK anymore, since I've been on XP so long.

FDISK is handy, just download a win 9x bootdisk here:

http://www.bootdisk.com/

Personally, I do ALL my partitioning with Ranish Partition Manager FREEWARE:

http://www.ranish.com/part/

as it gives you more control and allows you to SAVE your Partition Tables.

Another free tool (untested):

http://visopsys.org/partlogic/about.html

Whatever you use, always have a saved copy of your Partition table, here are a couple links:

http://www.partition-saving.com/

http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techi...g/diskmap-o.asp

The use of PARTITION MAGIC is NOT RECOMMENDED.

(it has some "non-standard way"of storing data on certain systems)

jaclaz

[jaclaz]

I guess the order should be :

FDISK all partitions

2K < 1GB install on C:\

Both Win2K installs

2003

XP

In this case it probably does not matter, but rule of the thumb is ALWAYS install systems in the order they come out, so I would say:

FDISK all partitions

2K < 1GB install on C:\

Both Win2K installs

XP

2003

(Remember that NTLDR and NTDETECT.COM, that will always be written on the First Active Partition, will be overwritten by next install, so it's good to install latest OS as the last one)

About the multi-booting, have a look at my posts here:

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=33030

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=34531

jaclaz

[cuddles]

Thanks so much man. I pulled this site after getting NO help on figuring this out on a few other hardware forums (can't blame them really), and was hoping for a reponse here. I probably won't get to doing all of this for a week or so, but you've definately got me off to the races. Thanks so much

[cuddles]

One more quick question. If I don't use the <1GB C:\ install, is there any way to keep C:\ as my main XP install and D:\ as my data partition, with the others following behind, or is there no way to do it?

C:\XP

D:\apps, etc

E:\2000

F:\2000

G:\2003

But still install them as the above order?

[jaclaz]

Yep, sure, then you' ll have:

C:\ First Primary Active partition XP (NTFS)

Extended partition with volumes

D:\ Data, etc. (if it is Common between systems it is better FAT32, if not NTFS)

E:\2000 NTFS

F:\2000 NTFS

G:\2003 NTFS

(if needed one more 1 GB partition FAT32 for swap file common between systems)

Install order:

1) win 2k 1st

2) win 2k 2nd

3) win XP 3rd

4) 2003 4th

jaclaz

P.S. Remember to instal Recovery Console when installing last OS (2003)

[cuddles]

Sounds good then

Does having the swap file on a seperate partition improve performance or degrade it at all?

[jaclaz]

There are many myths about Virtual Memory/Swap files, mostly because in the meantime hardware has changed.

Contrary to common beliefs, it is highly advisable to have the swap file on a separate partition for SECURITY, not PERFORMANCE reasons.

SECURITY REASONS:

should you have a DYNAMIC SIZE swap file on the same (only) partition (which is the default install for say 95% of computers) you could have this:

1) you delete accidentally some files (or filesystem gets corrupted)

2) for some reasons (possible malfunctions of some programs) the swap files grows in size

3) it is very likely that the swap file OVERWRITES the deleted/corrupted data

4) there is no way to recover data, unless you really need them and you can afford PROFESSIONAL ELECTRONIC DATA RECOVERY

PERFORMANCE REASONS

Please read here all needed info:

http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.php

My two cents on the matter:

1) the swap must be set as FIXED (same amount minimum/maximum), size typically 2,5 times your memory (this is just a guess value and must be recalculated depending on how much RAM you have and the use you make of the PC)

2) if possible have your swap file in a separate partition

3) if possible have it on a different disk (the faster the better)

4) if possible have it formatted as FAT32 (being a single file it will be faster)

5) if possible the partition should be in the part of the disk that have faster access

(usually it is around center of the disk, but some hard disks have faster access at the beginning)

6) the swap file must be either deleted (from a parallel install) or defragged from time to time

7) you should turn off ALL not needed services, see here for reference:

http://www.blackviper.com/

jaclaz

[cuddles]

One more question... since I've heard (and it's logical) that swap file performance is best when used on an entirely seperate drive, would it be possible to have all the partitions the same as they are, but not use Raid 0, and instead have the second 74GB saved for games, apps and swap file? So all OS'es would be on the first drive, with games, etc and swap on the second.

Would that work? Then I could use the remaining first drive for storage as well as holding the OSes and leave the second drive just for games and swap.