|
There are isolated problems with current patches, but they are well-known and documented on this site. |
Thinking of installing a 1TB Samsung SSD.
Current 1TB HDD is divided equally into 2 partitions “just because” and could be easily be put back into 1 partition (C:) before imaging with Macrium Reflect onto the new SSD.
From what I read, SSD’s like a lot of space to even out the wear and increase longevity.
So would it be best to give the SSD access to the whole drive?
What about the “Over Provisioning” topic?
Current 1TB HDD is divided equally into 2 partitions “just because” and could be easily be put back into 1 partition (C:) before imaging with Macrium Reflect onto the new SSD.
It has at least 4, most likely 5. The 2 that you mention as well as a hidden EFI partition, likely a hidden MSR partition, and a hidden Recovery partition.
So would it be best to give the SSD access to the whole drive?
That’s an individual decision. For me, no. I have 6 SSD’s on my dual boot daily driver, with a total of 17 visible partitions and 2 hidden partitions. I have a 2TB SATA SSD that is a single partition and is the target for my drive images. All the rest of my SSD’s have at least 3 partitions.
What about the “Over Provisioning” topic?
Over Provisioning takes part of your free space and turns it into invisible provisioning space. There is already hidden provisioning space used for wear leveling (to promote SSD longevity). Over Provisioning just adds to that hidden provisioning space by reducing the indicated free space. Again, that’s an individual choice. I don’t use it.
Current 1TB HDD is divided equally into 2 partitions “just because” and could be easily be put back into 1 partition (C:)
I have a C: SSD and D: HDD.
I don’t mix data with OS on the same drive. That way I can restore just the OS or data.
You have been thinking about doing this for 6 weeks. Time to do it and tidy up later. 
When you have done it, post a screenshot of the partition data so we can see whether merging C and D is worthwhile.
There is no need to over provision. The SSD will use the current free space for wear levelling, you don’t need to do anything extra – SSDs are pretty clever at this sort of thing, manufacturers don’t want early failure.
cheers, Paul
Keep your OS and Data on separate drives and not partitions on the same drive for these reasons.
1) “Everything in the same basket” is bad no matter what the topic. When the drive dies you lose both OS and Data (everything).
2) Two different kinds of backups – Image backup for the OS because when the OS becomes corrupt you most likely won’t be able to tell which part is corrupt to fix and will restore the entire OS from an image. Incremental backup (copying only new and changed files) for Data files because when a Data file goes corrupt you will know which file and only need that file restored (retrieved) and not the entire Data drive restored. OS and Data on separate drives allows two different kinds of backup at the same time.
HTH, Dana:))
Dana,
I agree with #1.
However, #2 ignores the fact that most imaging programs allow you to mount an image and restore selected files w/o restoring the entire image. Plus in most cases Imaging is faster than file by file backup (if not doing incrementals). I’m not a fan of incremental backups as the chains can get corrupted. Granted they can save some space though.
However, #2 ignores the fact that most imaging programs allow you to mount an image and restore selected files w/o restoring the entire image. Plus in most cases Imaging is faster than file by file backup (if not doing incrementals). I’m not a fan of incremental backups as the chains can get corrupted. Granted they can save some space though.
I don’t use an imaging program. My entire automatic backup system is using software that comes with Windows. For my Data backups I use a bat file that contains a Robocopy command to copy files that are new or have been changed to a separate backup drive. Robocopy also has a multi-thread option that copies way faster than normal copy functions. I have Task Scheduler set to run this backup and produce a report which has the details of the last backup. After a initial backup of 109 GBs of data most backups of changed or new data take about < 2 minutes and sometimes in seconds. I like this method better than imaging because deleted files will not be in the next backup image, but the backup of the deleted file remains where Robocopy copied to. To retrieve a file I simply access that folder on the backup drive, and I don’t have to mount an image to get it. I use Windows to create images of the OS and ever so often I will save an image to prevent Windows from deleting it when it makes the next image just in case. On a regular basis I copy (I use Robocopy commands) the backup drive to a different drive which is stored in a fire/water proof safe, although I have never had a need for the backup of the backups.
HTH, Dana:))
Donations from Plus members keep this site going. You can identify the people who support AskWoody by the Plus badge on their avatars.
AskWoody Plus members not only get access to all of the contents of this site -- including Susan Bradley's frequently updated Patch Watch listing -- they also receive weekly AskWoody Plus Newsletters (formerly Windows Secrets Newsletter) and AskWoody Plus Alerts, emails when there are important breaking developments.
Notifications
