OK to have 500GB hard drive as one partition?

"Jon D" wrote in message
...
I use XP Pro/SP2 at home. The PC hardware is a bit slow.

I have got a 500GB hard drive mainly to use as a backup for my main
data.

Is there anything (perhaps in XP or in NTFS or from good sense) which
suggests that I'm wiser not to make the whole 500 GB into one partition?

If it's a backup drive then there's no point partitioning it surely? Just
decide on a sensible directory structure such as...

c:\machine1\20070301\full
c:\machine1\20070302\changes
c:\machine2\20070301\full
c:\machine2\20070302\changes

Or something like that (um, wonder if it's better that have "full/changes"
before the datestamp). Now use something like robocopy (MS website) to
create a backup schedule and away you do.

FWIW, I've had to partition drives in the past (WinNT boot limit for
example) but it's always come back to bite me. Once-upon-a-time FAT16/32
meant you lost a lot of space on big drives because of large cluster sizes
but I don't think that's true with NTFS so there's no reason to partition.
Personally I wouldn't partition any drive any more.

Paul DS

In article ,
says...
johannes wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Bwadr! The same old gramophone track from rod speed.
Can't even come up with new insults, poor guy.

How odd that no one has ever seen anything
but this sort of puerile sniping from you, child.



And perhaps you regard your behaviour here as mature? Hmmm,
interesting.

--
Pete Ives
Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email

Yep, 4.36 or 7-8gigs per movie. (not 1GB per movie as another might say).

regards,
Marcel


"Michael C" schreef in bericht
...
"JAD" wrote in message
...
PVR PVR PVR PVR what else?

Anything to do with video really. Plenty of people are downloading movies.

Michael

While another might say things like 'fool you', I would just say: it's nice
to have 500GB
when you start downloading an entire 9 season television serie just before
going on vacation

regards,
Marcel



"JAD" schreef in bericht
...

"Jon D" wrote in message
...
I use XP Pro/SP2 at home. The PC hardware is a bit slow.

I have got a 500GB hard drive mainly to use as a backup for my main
data.

this is an external drive?


Is there anything (perhaps in XP or in NTFS or from good sense) which
suggests that I'm wiser not to make the whole 500 GB into one partition?

I'm a little old fashioned when it comes to this stuff. 500 gigs is over
kill for most
situations and a b*tch to back up (if its internal).
I cannot see where anybody needs to have 500 gigs on one physical drive.
At home anyway. I
do video and graphics quite often. Huge files on a temporary basis. This
is done on 1 x
160, 1 x 250 Hitachi internals. With OS/software backup on an external 160
WD. Most of my
production software runs from my server so its not installed on my
production rig. All my
'work' and 'work in progress' go unto DVD/CD, and on the external, on a
temporary basis so
its easy to get to.


I digress, I would partition it into 2x 250's , but that's based on
nothing but 'I' would
be more comfortable with it.

Marcel Overweel wrote:
Yep, 4.36 or 7-8gigs per movie. (not 1GB per movie as another might say).

regards,
Marcel


"Michael C" schreef in bericht
...
"JAD" wrote in message
...
PVR PVR PVR PVR what else?
Anything to do with video really. Plenty of people are downloading movies.

Michael

If DVD shrink is used to process DVDs, then the resulting files will be
around 4 gb - the same size as a single-layer DVD.

Peter wrote
says...
johannes wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Bwadr! The same old gramophone track from rod speed.
Can't even come up with new insults, poor guy.

How odd that no one has ever seen anything
but this sort of puerile sniping from you, child.

And perhaps you regard your behaviour here as mature?

I couldnt care less what fools like you 'think', child.

Rod Speed wrote:
Peter wrote
says...
johannes wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Bwadr! The same old gramophone track from rod speed.
Can't even come up with new insults, poor guy.

How odd that no one has ever seen anything
but this sort of puerile sniping from you, child.

And perhaps you regard your behaviour here as mature?

I couldnt care less what fools like you 'think', child.

[rod speed - clearly a case of arrested development - somewhere around
11 to 13 years old. doesn't the term "rod speed" refer to the flex
pattern of a fishing pole?]

Cal Vanize wrote:

[rod speed - clearly a case of arrested development - somewhere
around 11 to 13 years old.

Yeah, but kids can be fun.

Cal Vanize wrote
just the puerile **** thats all it can ever manage.

John Doe wrote:
Cal Vanize wrote:

[rod speed - clearly a case of arrested development - somewhere
around 11 to 13 years old.

Yeah, but kids can be fun.

Reasonably well behaved kids, with some manners.

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
http://cbfalconer.home.att.net