 |
 |
Partitition Hard Disk?
|
 |
|
 |
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
I ordered a PowerMac with a 250MB hard disk. Should I leave it alone or partition it for performance?
thanks in advance.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
I would look to upgrading the HD myself.

|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Lots and lots and lots of threads on this subject.
|

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Oslo, Norway
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by mosespatrader:
I ordered a PowerMac with a 250MB hard disk. Should I leave it alone or partition it for performance?
A 250MB HDD is not much to split! 
I would definatelly leave as one "big" partition...
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Admin Emeritus 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
There really are TONS of discussions on this topic in the forums. Search for "partition" "partitioning" and you should find them.
tooki
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
I recently went through the same process and read all the threads, books, etc. I concluded that unless one of the following applies, there's not much point in partitioning with Panther:
1) You're a developer and want different operating systems on different partitions. It used to be common to put OS 9 on a separate partition from OS X, but the G5 can't boot in OS 9, so that particular reason is gone.
2) You want a clean version of OS X on a separate partition, so in case of an emergency you can boot from that partition and do repairs on the other one. OS X has been so reliable for me that I see this as unnecessary (I would just boot from the DVD anyway), and if the drive fails you're screwed anyway, but I'm sure there are those who would disagree, and I guess it can't hurt if you don't need the extra space.
3) You want a separate "scratch" partition for video, image, or audio editing. The theory is that these files are very demanding for a drive and benefit from being on their own disc or partition, where they won't get fragmented among other stuff. Also, when you're done with a project, you can erase its partition and have a clean start. Personally, I've never had a problem editing video on the same partition as everything else, but having a separate scratch disc seems like a sound idea if you have the space. I'm sure there are more experienced users who can speak to this.
My own solution was to put OS X and all of my apps, accounts, and music files on one unpartitioned drive, then install a separate drive for use as a scratch disc (which I partitioned for different projects).
Hope this helps. I like to keep things simple. But I don't claim to be an authority, so don't anyone flame me. 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Admin Emeritus 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by zigzag:
3) You want a separate "scratch" partition for video, image, or audio editing. The theory is that these files are very demanding for a drive and benefit from being on their own disc or partition, where they won't get fragmented among other stuff. Also, when you're done with a project, you can erase its partition and have a clean start. Personally, I've never had a problem editing video on the same partition as everything else, but having a separate scratch disc seems like a sound idea if you have the space. I'm sure there are more experienced users who can speak to this.
A separate scratch disk can be very good for performance. A separate scratch partition can actually reduce performance, by keeping the scratch files physically distant from the application and boot partiton, where they might have been near each other had they been on the same partition.
Not worth it or necessary, IMHO.
tooki
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by tooki:
A separate scratch disk can be very good for performance. A separate scratch partition can actually reduce performance, by keeping the scratch files physically distant from the application and boot partiton, where they might have been near each other had they been on the same partition.
Not worth it or necessary, IMHO.
The files on a scratch disk are also distant from the OS/app, so I assume you mean to say that when they're on the same disk but on separate partitions, the drive has to keep up with two partitions at once and therefore has to work harder, whereas when the files are on a separate disk, the drives don't have to work as hard because they're not trying to do two things at once.
Makes sense, if that's what you're saying. Thanks.
I hope the rest of my analysis was sound.
(Last edited by zigzag; Jun 25, 2004 at 08:17 PM.
)
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
 |
Forum Rules
|
 |
 |
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|