Portioning advice please.

U

Uli

Expert Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,270
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,

Hope you can help me.

I have a 1tb drive and would like to make 3 drives from it is it possible?
OK if that’s not possible then I would like to make two drives, but then my problem is would it be possible to do it and keep my existing operating system on the one side of the drive without loosing any information?
 
The word you're looking for is "partitioning" and not "portion".

Yes, you can split a drive with an existing OS into as many partitions as you like.
 
lol yes I know spelling mistake :) hehe

can you advise me how? what program should I use and are there any free ones around?
Is it fairly easy to do?
 
When I still used Windows I always found the Acronis software to be of high quality.

It is not free I should add.
 
Read a very interesting theory/observation the other day that i had never thought of before. Your hard drive fills from the outside inwards and spins faster on the outside, you can use this to your advantage by creating an outside partition to be used for all your programs like Windows and Photoshop which should enable them to load/run faster while storing everything like movies on the more inward sections. As i said though i haven't tried/tested the idea but the theory sounds plausible enough (:

To answer your question, yes you can partition your drive, i haven't done it in ages though, I used partition magic and windows which both seemed simple enough but i have never done it while keeping the current OS intact.
 
@ Voltorr, You are correct but actualy the drive is faster on the inside and not out side as thought.
 
well I managed and used EASEUS Partition Master home-free.

Very easy to do with tis program. a matter of seconds and its done.
 
Uli said:
@ Voltorr, You are correct but actualy the drive is faster on the inside and not out side as thought.
Click to expand...

:erm: Have you given any thought to what you wrote?


More data passes under the head in one revolution at the outer edge than at the inner edge. It's not rocket science.
 
ponder said:
:erm: Have you given any thought to what you wrote?


More data passes under the head in one revolution at the outer edge than at the inner edge. It's not rocket science.
Click to expand...

+1 There is no way the inside of the disk spins faster when compared to the outside track....
 
ok well think about this the track gets covered much, much quicker on the inside than the outside.

but yes to think about your story, you are correct that the data amount covered at the same time is much much more at the same time as what is covered on the inside of the drive. So yes I would say you are completely correct.
 
Uli said:
ok well think about this the track gets covered much, much quicker on the inside than the outside.
Click to expand...

:erm: Have you given any thought to what you wrote? (Same old record spinning)

The time of one revolution is constant irrespective of inner or outer edge. Mark a point on the inside and outside of a cd (straight line) and spin it by hand and you will see the time is constant for both points for a given rpm. The only variance is the distance thus the inner speed is slower than the outer speed.

If you keep this up you are going to drive me to drink :D
 
That actually quite interesting, the rpm are the same and since it's one disk and the inside is connected to the outside one would think the inside couldn't be moving faster or it would "break" the disk. But in one revolution which would take take the same amount of time (it's connected the one part can't move ahead) the distance covered on the outside is far greater. So distance / time would give the speed and outside is faster. So just because they are connected doesn't mean they are moving at the same speed....... original assumption must have been wrong, somehow i sure i knew that already? And none of this is taking into account the reading head on the disk which i think would further detriment the inside's speed.

Funny but when on those spinning things in the park don't you feel like you are going slower when you lean backwards not faster? No wait that just makes you feel like you aren't spinning as fast and i think your eyes can focus more........ anyway that is enough ramblings from me i think.
 
Voltorr said:
That actually quite interesting, the rpm are the same and since it's one disk and the inside is connected to the outside one would think the inside couldn't be moving faster or it would "break" the disk. But in one revolution which would take take the same amount of time (it's connected the one part can't move ahead) the distance covered on the outside is far greater. So distance / time would give the speed and outside is faster. So just because they are connected doesn't mean they are moving at the same speed....... original assumption must have been wrong, somehow i sure i knew that already? And none of this is taking into account the reading head on the disk which i think would further detriment the inside's speed.

Funny but when on those spinning things in the park don't you feel like you are going slower when you lean backwards not faster? No wait that just makes you feel like you aren't spinning as fast and i think your eyes can focus more........ anyway that is enough ramblings from me i think.
Click to expand...

Not sure if I understand this :D A disk has tracks and sectors. A hard disk platter looks like a dart board, with the concentric circles being the tracks, and the pie shaped slices being the sectors. On older disks sector sizes were all equal, and each track had an equal number of sectors (the outside sectors were physically bigger - think of the double and triple size on the dart board; but the actual data on the outside sectors was less dense than the inside sectors).

Modern disks do not have an equal number of sectors per track (all sectors are equally dense), and the outside tracks have more sectors than the inside track. That is why a disk has better performance when accessing the outside tracks - the heads can access more sectors per revolution, which increases IO.
 
Conradl said:
Not sure if I understand this :D A disk has tracks and sectors. A hard disk platter looks like a dart board, with the concentric circles being the tracks, and the pie shaped slices being the sectors. On older disks sector sizes were all equal, and each track had an equal number of sectors (the outside sectors were physically bigger - think of the double and triple size on the dart board; but the actual data on the outside sectors was less dense than the inside sectors).

Modern disks do not have an equal number of sectors per track (all sectors are equally dense), and the outside tracks have more sectors than the inside track. That is why a disk has better performance when accessing the outside tracks - the heads can access more sectors per revolution, which increases IO.
Click to expand...

thanks, that actually made a hell of a lot of sense...assuming each sector isn't the whole pie on the dart board? I always looked at hard drives like vinyl records which accounted for the tracks but sectors never really featured (:
 
Here is an illustration and explanation of the track/sector layout on an HDD.

Obviously the rotational speed is constant over the entire disk. The tangential velocity at a point is equal to the radius(to that point) multiplied by the rotational speed, i.e. the tangential velocity at the the outer edge is greater than at the inside of the disk.
But this has all been explained quite well prevoiusly:)
 
KhoisanX said:
Here is an illustration and explanation of the track/sector layout on an HDD.

Obviously the rotational speed is constant over the entire disk. The tangential velocity at a point is equal to the radius(to that point) multiplied by the rotational speed, i.e. the tangential velocity at the the outer edge is greater than at the inside of the disk.
But this has all been explained quite well prevoiusly:)
Click to expand...

/Joins Ponder in looking for bottle of strong schit
 
When I setup a PC, I create a swap partition of 10gb as the first partition on the disk(fastest) and then use the partition exclusively for page-file or swap file or both depending on OS. Since doing this I find Pcs to be more stable at the HDD gets closer to capacity

/end derail
 
Conradl said:
/Joins Ponder in looking for bottle of strong schit
Click to expand...

drunk-37.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X