[Question/Opinion]Which method is better?

[leedolman]

Is there an advantage of having a seperate partition for Windows, Program Files & Documents as opposed to having them all on the same drive?

Since my first unattended install over a year ago I've had it setup so Windows would be on C:\, Program Files on D:\ and My Documents on E:\

Just wondering if there is any advantage of this, or if it's just as easy to have it all on the same drive

Edited April 9, 2006 by leedolman

[Sonic]

I think just My Documents on separate partition has advantage to keep data if reinstall system. Programs must be reinstalled if system is reinstalled so I keep Program Files & Windows on the same partition.

Goodbye.

[nitroshift]

I've got everything on the windows partition but regularly back up my documents onto another partition in case windows becomes corrupt. as for programs they would need to be reinstalled, so here i agree with sonic.

[leedolman]

SO there is no performance advantage using this method?

I have my documents backed up on External HD, so I will probably just unpartition my drive then

Thanks

[cluberti]

Not only is there not a clear advantage in having programs on a separate drive or partition, but some windows updates will fail to install properly if the program files folder is not on the boot volume.

[The008]

I use and recommend to keep your documents in a separate partition (in a separate HD sometimes maybe better) - in NTFS, and Windows and program files in the first (C:) partition / HD, in FAT32, 'cause it's faster than NTFS. So if you have any problem with virus, malwares, etc. you can easily format your C: and reinstall your Windows without lose your documents. I use this way.

[Sonic]

... and Windows and program files in the first (C:) partition / HD, in FAT32, 'cause it's faster than NTFS.

You can see/note the perfomance difference with NTFS and FAT32 ?

FAT32 is just for persons don't want any problems with rights managements or/and work with other os ... NTFS is a modern file system, fragmentation is weak, and I highly recommend it.

[The008]

yeah, a LOT of people tested and got different results using FAT32 and NTFS. I saw a complete description in a site and the result was that FAT32 is faster than NTFS, but NTFS is more secure for file storage. They also recommend to create a third partition in FAT16 to use for Pagefile, 'cause FAT16 is faster than FAT32 and NTFS. These old formats are faster but less secure, so I recommend using both.

[Mr Snrub]

For simplicity, security and resilience just use the defaults (system drive, NTFS format) and make regular backups of your documents.

There are those who argue that having the OS, applications and data on separate partitions is actually worse for performance because the hard drive head has to move further between random reads for uncached data.

(Writes are handled by the Cache Manager in Windows so shouldn't suffer quite so much, depending on the how the application flushes.)

If there is an application or hotfix which expects your profile to be on the system partition (for whatever reason) it could be very difficult to understand why it crashes or fails to install.

Also, between OS installs your user SIDs will not be consistent so holding My Documents on a separate partition means you need to take ownership (unless you are in a domain).

Any advice to install Windows on a FATxx system is bad advice IMO - probably from the same people recommending disabling Windows Firewall or not installing SP2 or AV.

I doubt you could observe any significant real world (not synthetic benchmark) performance difference between FAT and NTFS.

NTFS security has to do with restricting access to files and data on a per-user basis, and nothing to do with detecting viruses or malware (this is the realm of 3rd party software and/or limiting user access by not being logged in as an administrator).

Win9x has only FAT and neither has a concept of different users - so dad's accounts files are visible to his kids, along with his "not for kids" pictures - a user is a user is a user.

Edited April 9, 2006 by Mr Snrub

[Andromeda43]

NT (XP, 2k, NT) was written to be a Business system and never a HOME computer OS.

So, security was of primary importance. Then MS in it's infinite wisdom decided to force it down the throats of the home user. (I guess they were just too lazy to fix the problems in 98)

The little ol' granny who just wants to eMail her grandkids, is now stuck with a humongous Business system in her home computer. If the OS gets hosed, all the pictures of her grandkids and all the recipies she's saved are lost to her. And, to a good share of the Geeks (tech's) out there too. All those guys know how to do is run the restore disk that came with the PC, if there even was one, and there goes all of granny's STUFF.

So, what is all this Security stuff about anyway. How does that help granny?

Does it keep out the viruses, spyware or hackers.....Heck NO it don't. She still needs all the same protection software as if she had '98.

I'm really getting sick of hearing all this "Security" crap, when talking about XP on a home computer.

It's a bunch of bull xxxx!

SO, just keep your whole computer (both partitions) in FAT-32 mode and it will run faster and be very fixable in case of trouble. Any half way decent tech can surely figger out how to boot up the PC with a boot floppy or CD and go in and fix things, remove bad files or access data for saving. I know I sure can!

And stop telling people to get a second HD. Many (even most) computers today are made so cheaply that there isn't any place for a second HD and the stock PSU is too weak to properly power one anyway.

Heck, I saw one PSU die when I added an extra case fan to the system.

So, we're back to the original question of this thread.....about partitioning.

You can go completely crazy with partitioning. But there's NO reason to. NO increase in efficiency is going to be seen from adding a partition to store your stuff. Leave the entire OS, programs and pagefile on C: and only store stuff you don't want to have to scan and defrag over and over again, on your D: partition.

Recently, I installed MS Office on my 'puter. I did a custom install and put the program files on D:.

It runs just fine from there and my scans and defrag won't be slowed down by that mass of files.

I also do Ghost backups of my C: partition several times a week. I run it (Ghost) from a boot disk with a neat little menu that lets me do some cleanup on C: before I do the actual backup.

I run several batch files to delete the pagefile, old restore points and of course all the temp files, etc. on the HD. Not possible with an NTFS drive.

Then I run Ghost and do a 'quickie' backup to D: in just four (4) minutes, or I let Ghost burn the Image file directly to a DVD in about 30 minutes. In either case, that file is greatly reduced in size (almost 2 gigs) by my cleanup which can only be done on a FAT-32 formatted hard drive.

When you have a Ghost image file on a DVD, you never need to worry about loosing ANYTHING!

Let your HD go up in smoke and your data is still safe.

At that point, how many partitions you had is pretty immaterial.

Backing up several different partitions is a whole lot harder than just backing your C: drive.

Keep at least the master copy of your data on C:

Be Safe, Be Happy!

Andromeda

[nmX.Memnoch]

Here we go with the FAT32 vs. NTFS argument again...

So, what is all this Security stuff about anyway. How does that help granny?

Does it keep out the viruses, spyware or hackers.....Heck NO it don't. She still needs all the same protection software as if she had '98.

Don't make Granny an Admin on her machine and it will most certainly keep out viruses and spyware. Why? Because under the default NTFS security permissions malware won't have access to write to the areas where it really matters (%SYSTEMROOT%, %PROGRAMFILES%, HKLM registry hive, etc).

Hackers are kept out by completely different methods. However, proper NTFS permissions will make it much more difficult for them to gain access to information should they get in.

Your security chain is only as good as the weakest link...

Edited April 9, 2006 by nmX.Memnoch

[At0mic]

its best to keep programs on a seperate partition. I've edited my registry so that when I install a program, it defaults to D: so I dont even have to manually choose when I install something.

Defragmentation - when you install and remove a lot of programs, D: starts to suffer from fragmentation but fragmentation on C: is limited.

When I format c: and re-install windows, I dont have to reinstall my games. They just work. Most programs have to be reinstalled but some still work. Games dont seem to have any problems. Half-life asks for the CD-KEY again but thats about it.

Oh, and about this NTFS vs FAT thing, NTFS uses logging when writing files to a harddisk. If a system crashes before it gets a chance to write the latest changes to the drive, diskcheck can view the NTFS transaction logs and write the changes to repair your partition. Also, NTFS doesn't get defraged so easily. FAT is a nightmare for defragmentation. Please can one of you FAT junkies post a link to some benchmarks which prove FAT is faster than NTFS? It depends which cluster size you choose as well when you create your partition/volume (big clusters are faster but use more drive space). Granted, When you only have a few files on a small partition, FAT will be faster. However, NTFS dominates when you have a lot of files on a large drive. Especially when you use dynamic volumes as opposed to basic partitions.

Edited April 9, 2006 by At0mic