New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What is your partition set up? - Page 3

post #41 of 44
8/25/03 at 8:37pm
It depends on your hard drive specs. In general a virtural memory is about 100 times slower than physical RAM. Plus it wears out your hard drive. That's why it is always better to have more physical RAM (if your system is constantly using the virtural memory). For most applications (standard office tasks, games, etc.) 512 to 1024MB of RAM is plenty (unless your running them all at the same time) and you can get away with a relatively small swap file.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 44
8/25/03 at 8:39pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by mmarkin
Is it possible to ghost to a file instead of a partition? I dont want to make tiny little partitions just for that.
What I meant by my question is if I can ghost the contents of a partition and store it in one file, putting that one file along with other stuff on a different partition. Can I? Looks like DrvImager does that. What about the Norton progs?

Mikhail
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 44
8/25/03 at 11:26pm
I use my laptop with VMware for work. I have a 60gb HD in my current loaner laptop. Here's my setup.

10gb = Windows XP Pro for home use
10gb = Windows XP Pro for work use
25gb = Location where all applications that are common between home and work are located
15gb = Public space. A spot where I put software installs and software development source.

It works pretty well for me...I hope this helps.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 44
10/20/03 at 4:43pm
Quote:
Originally posted by myrkat
Basically, FAT32 really gets wasteful after only 5 or 10 GB (sadly, enough) when using the default cluster size.

Microsoft definitely recommends NTFS for partitions larger than 32 GB - so much so, that WinXP doesn't format FAT partitions above that size (go ahead, try it!).

However, with smaller sizes, FAT is likely to be more efficient — certainly below 4 GB, and probably below 8 GB. But NTFS should be used for partitions >16 GB, since FAT 32 cluster size goes up to 16 KB... and higher as one moves up in size.

Now there are (or were, with win9x) hidden switches in the FORMAT comand that forced a particular cluster size (I remember trying the minimum 512byte - like NTFS has). However, the filesystem becomes INCREDIBLY inefficient. That 512byte FAT32 experiment I did caused HUGE overhead in resources as well as very SLOW read/writes to the disk. Basically, because of all the extra management that went on.

Personally, I only have NTFS for windows partitions. I'm only thinking of having some FAT32 as a common share when I dual-boot linux & windows. I do not care about wasted space inefficiencies as I have 120GB total space on my laptop and much more than that on my family server.

-myrkat
Good info. man I learned something from reading this post.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sager & Clevo Notebooks