Partition Issue - FAT32, temp, Wins, Prog File, Doc&Set, Personal Data

[Wai_Wai]

Partition Issue - FAT32, temp, Wins, Prog File, Doc&Set, Personal Data

I'm using Wins XP Pro (SP1)
I would like to ask for comments/suggestions for the following partition plans:

C: FAT32 drive + SWAP/pagefile, temp, no-need-keep files - 3GB
I will format all my drives as NTFS. But I don't know if it is a good idea to keep a FAT32 drive. To me it seems safe to keep just in case it needs. (eg I think DOS can only read FAT32, right?) <-- Tell me why if you don't suggest this. :P
But it is a waste to put a FAT32 drive empty. So I use this drive to put some rubbish, or temporary files. These files include:
- pagefile.sys
- user temp and system temp files
- log files
- Internet temporary files
- cookies, recent, history etc.
- leave space for some stubborn programs which will install here
(PS: I woud like to move Hiberfil.sys to there too, but I don't think I can. Please comfirm it!)

D: Donwload Buffer Zone - 5GB
When you download stuff, there will be quite many read/write process. Do you agree? So I would like to keep it in one specific drive. Reasons:
- easy management (ie all downloads are there)
- avoid fragmentation split

After I finished the downloads, I will move them to my prsonal data drives.


E &/or F: ??? Doc and Settings(D&S), Program Files(PF), Windows(Wi) ???

I wonder which one I should implement:
E: Doc and Settings(D&S), Program Files(PF), Windows(Wi) - 30GB
OR
E: Windows(Wi) - 10GB
F: Doc and Settings(D&S), Program Files(PF) - 20GB

Which one would you suggest, and most importantly, why?

You may consider the following factors:
- fragmentation rate
- performance
- reliabilty/stability
- Cloning issues (eg by Norton Ghost)


G: More-frequently altered personal data (eg desktop, documents, texts, notes in My Documents) - 20GB

H: Less-frequently altered personal data (eg programs, movies, films) - the rest of free space


So do you have any comments/suggestions about the above partiton plan?
Thanks a lot for your help.

[bluegreenshxt]

welll i guess things work differntly for everybody....i personally dont recomend putting things over so many different partitions...it's pretty confusing...

i use 2 partitions, one for all my programs, os files and everything my computer does is on that partition...the second partition is for saved games or documents, mp3's, pictures and other things i want to keep (each time i format i only format the first partition)...it's a lot easier than trying to keep so many different partitions on one comp...(ie keeping track of where things are, and having to move them to differnt drives...but then and again...i format every few months (at the longest) so this work's well for me...

[therealwesty]

I like to keep it simple as well... I actually have 3 partitions now (across 2 drives). My 36GB Raptor contains WindowsXP and all my installed software. My 200GB drive is split in two and one partition contains all my documents, photos and media. The second partition on the 200GB drive is where I store all my DVD rips.

I download a lot.. usually just to a 'New Downloads' folder on the partition where my documents and such are stored. Fragmenting is not a problem so long as you fallow a routine defrag schedule.

I wouldn't bother with a FAT32 partition, anything I'd need DOS for I could do with the WinXP recovery consol.

[Rudegar]

i my exp then the more partitions you have the more likely you made one of them too small and you have to break the rules about what goes where

[Wai_Wai]

So does anyone know what's the use of separating Doc and Settings(D&S), Program Files(PF) from Windows(Wi) folders?

I would like to express my own opinion and feeling. I don't feel more partitions can cause confusion. A drive is simply a very big folder. And the drive labels are simply the names of the folders. If I can manage a lot of folders, it is the same as partitions. No difference to me.

Relating to fragmentation factor, I would like to keep the freqency of defragmentation to as low as possible, and to focus on a few drives only. It can be a pain to defrag a 200GB HDD every week. If I manage well, I can keep the fragmentation low even after 1 year.

In my example, I will only defrag E &/or F drives on a rountinely basis. I think I don't need to defrag drive C and D because they are not important. And after I throw all the rubbish away, the fragmentation should be gone, right? (<-- Please confirm if you know :P)

[Wai_Wai]

i my exp then the more partitions you have the more likely you made one of them too small and you have to break the rules about what goes where
That is another issue which concerns me. But I have thought of solutions which are fine to me.

1) Use partition magic
2) Simply put the files on another drive, and place its shortcut to the original drive for file management purpose.

And I leave far much space for my windows and program files. I don't think I'm going to use use 30GB. Maybe I just use up less than 1/3. :P

[Rudegar]

first of all why fat32 ?

2th then you dont really need to make them drives you can just mount a partition as the dir
you can do that with xp and 2k without any problems
and then you dont have to deal with default install path always being c:\program files

[Wai_Wai]

first of all why fat32 ?

2th then you dont really need to make them drives you can just mount a partition as the dir
you can do that with xp and 2k without any problems
and then you dont have to deal with default install path always being c:\program files
There are several reasons:
- DOS can only read FAT32 files, right?
- Just in case if some old programs, other non-Win OS need FAT32
- Just in case when it causes booting problems (Wins can't boot), FAT32 drive can help.
- FAT32 seems to be more effective under 3GB.
- FAT32 seems to be less vulnerable to fragmentation.

I don't know much whether I do need it or not nowadays. Would you mind to clear things up that why you don't suggest FAT32 (it seems you do :P)?

"you dont really need to make them drives you can just mount a partition as the dir
you can do that with xp and 2k without any problems
and then you dont have to deal with default install path always being c:\program files"

Can't really get the meaning.
Do you mean I don't need to partition so many drives? What does it mean by mounting a partition? How to do?
How can this sort out the problem of default installation path?

[Rudegar]

i mean that you can make lets say
partition 1 is where you want program files
partition 2 is where you want my doc
partition 3 is just windows

then you right click my com
and choose manage
choose disk manage
and choose the partition you want to put somewhere
and rightclick on it and choose change drive letter or path
and add the path you want the partition to be
like c:\program files

and when you go into program files dir you go into the other partition
linux / unix and even ms's pocketpc's have don it like that for ages

of cause i havent really used fat32 in years so it could be that it dont support that

also i dont really think that fat32 is need less defrag then ntfs at least when ntfs came out they said it dident suffer from fragmation at all
which was why they dident add defrag to the line before 2k

[Wai_Wai]

That is what I know:
- NTFS is vulnrable to fragmentation. if the fragmentation is high, its performance will affected more greatly than that of FAT32
- NTFS needs enough space. If memory serves,if the drive is 85% full or higher, its performace drops more sharply than that of FAT32

[Rudegar]

here are some links about it including how to make dos/windows 9X read and write ntfs
http://faq.arstechnica.com/link.php?i=1227&PHPSESSID=509f173b366a4078cd9f67dda6848c6b

http://www.thundercloud.net/information-avenue/ntfs-vs-fat32/
http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/expert/russel_october01.mspx