RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
No. Actually partitioning like that is likely to hurt. -sc From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 [cid:image001.gif@01C93915.B524E400] NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~inline: image001.gif
Re: Basic Drive Partition Question
No articles but it's common knowledge that you have to have seperate spindles to maintain performance with Exchange. You're still doing read|write with a single drives heads no matter how you split it up. John W. Cook Systems Administrator Partnership For Strong Families Painfully sent to you from my Blackberry From: Bill Lambert To: NT System Admin Issues Sent: Tue Oct 28 15:56:54 2008 Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We’ve been arguing here…and I can’t find anything definitive on Google… Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn’t be the first time I’ve been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 [cid:image001.gif@01C9390D.6A9AFCB0] NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties. Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~ inline: image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
Lol...that's too funny!!! From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 [cid:image001.gif@01C93924.347A83A0] NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~inline: image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
Not funny at all, actually; it used to be quite common to avoid full stroke access. You never wanted a disk to use more than 20% of its stroke time in order to maximize performance. I saw this in mainframes, in large database rollouts, in large Exchange rollouts, etc. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:40 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Lol...that's too funny!!! From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. _ From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here.and I can't find anything definitive on Google. Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
Sam what software do you use to accomplish that partitioning? Cheers. From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
ha ha, none :) I don't actually follow this practice... But I KNOW there is software out there that can do this! More info after a quick google search... http://partition.radified.com/partitioning_2.htm From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of lists Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:50 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Sam what software do you use to accomplish that partitioning? Cheers. From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
From a friend of mine at Fujitsu. There is no longer any point to short stroking a drive. Modern Drives have recording density zones that basically change with the distance from center. I am not sure there's been a non-zoned drive made in about a decade...:) S From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:44 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Not funny at all, actually; it used to be quite common to avoid full stroke access. You never wanted a disk to use more than 20% of its stroke time in order to maximize performance. I saw this in mainframes, in large database rollouts, in large Exchange rollouts, etc. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:40 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Lol...that's too funny!!! From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 [cid:image001.gif@01C93926.B896F090] NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~inline: image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
Dunno. I bow to her expertise. From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 6:02 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Interesting, I see your point. Still though, the head would be jumping around a lot less. Wouldn't that contribute to some gains? From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question From a friend of mine at Fujitsu. There is no longer any point to short stroking a drive. Modern Drives have recording density zones that basically change with the distance from center. I am not sure there's been a non-zoned drive made in about a decade...:) S From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:44 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Not funny at all, actually; it used to be quite common to avoid full stroke access. You never wanted a disk to use more than 20% of its stroke time in order to maximize performance. I saw this in mainframes, in large database rollouts, in large Exchange rollouts, etc. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:40 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Lol...that's too funny!!! From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 [cid:image001.gif@01C93929.229FA520] NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~inline: image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
I said USED TO BE. I'm old. J Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:02 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Interesting, I see your point. Still though, the head would be jumping around a lot less. Wouldn't that contribute to some gains? _ From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question From a friend of mine at Fujitsu. There is no longer any point to short stroking a drive. Modern Drives have recording density zones that basically change with the distance from center. I am not sure there's been a non-zoned drive made in about a decade...:) S From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:44 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Not funny at all, actually; it used to be quite common to avoid full stroke access. You never wanted a disk to use more than 20% of its stroke time in order to maximize performance. I saw this in mainframes, in large database rollouts, in large Exchange rollouts, etc. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:40 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Lol...that's too funny!!! From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. _ From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here.and I can't find anything definitive on Google. Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
I expect a full report from her by the morning. :) Sam From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:15 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Dunno. I bow to her expertise. From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 6:02 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Interesting, I see your point. Still though, the head would be jumping around a lot less. Wouldn't that contribute to some gains? From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question From a friend of mine at Fujitsu. There is no longer any point to short stroking a drive. Modern Drives have recording density zones that basically change with the distance from center. I am not sure there's been a non-zoned drive made in about a decade...:) S From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:44 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Not funny at all, actually; it used to be quite common to avoid full stroke access. You never wanted a disk to use more than 20% of its stroke time in order to maximize performance. I saw this in mainframes, in large database rollouts, in large Exchange rollouts, etc. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:40 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Lol...that's too funny!!! From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
Before Mulholland chips in...Not as old as me!! :) From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 6:10 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I said USED TO BE. I'm old. :) Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:02 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Interesting, I see your point. Still though, the head would be jumping around a lot less. Wouldn't that contribute to some gains? From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question From a friend of mine at Fujitsu. There is no longer any point to short stroking a drive. Modern Drives have recording density zones that basically change with the distance from center. I am not sure there's been a non-zoned drive made in about a decade...:) S From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:44 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Not funny at all, actually; it used to be quite common to avoid full stroke access. You never wanted a disk to use more than 20% of its stroke time in order to maximize performance. I saw this in mainframes, in large database rollouts, in large Exchange rollouts, etc. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:40 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Lol...that's too funny!!! From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 [cid:image001.gif@01C93929.FD67CB10] NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~inline: image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
I covered this recently in pretty good detail on my blog and in EMO. Start here: http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2008/09/19/it-s-all-about-the-iops-silly.aspx I’ve got a half-chapter on this topic in my upcoming book, because it’s something that confuses far too many people. There I include examples calculating the numbers of disks required for small, medium, and large organizations; how RAID-1 and RAID-5 affect those IOPS calculations, and whether you actually need more than one disk (if not for RAID). And, of course, how you properly monitor for all of this. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: John Cook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:01 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Basic Drive Partition Question No articles but it's common knowledge that you have to have seperate spindles to maintain performance with Exchange. You're still doing read|write with a single drives heads no matter how you split it up. John W. Cook Systems Administrator Partnership For Strong Families Painfully sent to you from my Blackberry _ From: Bill Lambert To: NT System Admin Issues Sent: Tue Oct 28 15:56:54 2008 Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We’ve been arguing here…and I can’t find anything definitive on Google… Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn’t be the first time I’ve been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. _ CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties. Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
The drive heads are still gonna have to thrash back and forth from partition zone to partition zone, which is NEVER gonna be faster than having separate spindles, and the same or slower than a single partition with everything on it. Erik Goldoff IT Consultant Systems, Networks, Security _ From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. _ From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We’ve been arguing here…and I can’t find anything definitive on Google… Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn’t be the first time I’ve been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.4/1749 - Release Date: 10/28/2008 10:04 AM ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
No way in hell would I put mbs in your bracket!! :p You did ask for it! From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 8:21 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Before Mulholland chips in...Not as old as me!! :) From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 6:10 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I said USED TO BE. I'm old. :) Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:02 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Interesting, I see your point. Still though, the head would be jumping around a lot less. Wouldn't that contribute to some gains? From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:58 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question From a friend of mine at Fujitsu. There is no longer any point to short stroking a drive. Modern Drives have recording density zones that basically change with the distance from center. I am not sure there's been a non-zoned drive made in about a decade...:) S From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:44 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Not funny at all, actually; it used to be quite common to avoid full stroke access. You never wanted a disk to use more than 20% of its stroke time in order to maximize performance. I saw this in mainframes, in large database rollouts, in large Exchange rollouts, etc. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:40 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Lol...that's too funny!!! From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:31 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question I say yes. What if you create a partition on the faster, outer edge of the drive platters, and put your most accessed system files there, or the whole OS? And less accessed files toward the inside of the drive. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Basic Drive Partition Question Performance no, perhaps even a small hit to performance. But you can keep the data on another partition to keep it from filling and crashing the whole OS if it were just all on one partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here...and I can't find anything definitive on Google... Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 [cid:image001.gif@01C939B0.7D339690] NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~inline: image001.gif
RE: Basic Drive Partition Question
It would depend on how you would deploy the server, IMHO. Keep in mind that I'm strictly a SMB guy deploying a single SBS in most cases, so my preference for partitioning a single drive has more to do with the restrictions I have to deal with for Shadow Copy per partition. From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 12:57 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Basic Drive Partition Question We've been arguing here.and I can't find anything definitive on Google. Is there any gain in performance if you have a single (NTFS) drive in two partitions? One partition for the OS and the other for everything else? I say no but it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Bill Lambert Windows System Administrator Concuity A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. Phone 847-941-9206 Fax 847-465-9147 NASDAQ: TTPA The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~image001.gif
