I’ve been plugging Jeremy C. Wright (not to be mistaken with Jeremy P. Wright, another blogger) quite a bit lately. He’s an old friend of mine and author of the popular Ensight.org and spearhead person for the new The Bloggist, which I have also promoted and linked to.
In some recent discussion, he has agreed to guest blog here at Technosailor. I don’t know what to expect, but I’ve given him free reign to post whatever he wants in whatever way he sees fit. It will likely be some kind of Microsoft B.S. or some new enterprise ditty he’s dreaming up at the time. ;) Whatever it is, it will be insightful and lively.
Welcome, Jeremy.
Aaron
Popularity: 1% [?]
About Aaron
The SPF crew re-uniting ? :)
The SPF crew re-uniting ? :)
The SPF crew re-uniting ? :)
If you drive through DC just a bit slower you will see them.
If you drive through DC just a bit slower you will see them.
If you drive through DC just a bit slower you will see them.
On a single user machine, this is not a requirement. It’s not a requirement in enterprise, but I think it’s better. I agree with this emailer who responded to the Lockergnome post, but I only agree in a non-multiuser environment:
No, the reason that dual-partition images are old school is that two is far too few! ;-)
Seriously: I’ve found that Windows machines perform FAR better when the drive is partitioned in smaller pieces. One prominent principle is that you need to keep free space near to where it will be needed. For this reason, you’ll get better performance by putting the user’s profile and major application directories on separate partitions. Partitions can still be linked (via Win2k’s path mounting) to the same place in the file tree, and can be (to neophytes) indistinguishable from directories on the C: partition.
Similary, swap performance can be enhanced by giving swap its own partition near the start of the drive. (Rule of thumb: swap should be near or in the most-used partition on the least-used hard drive.)
E-mail and other major applications will each benefit from having separate partitions, which are now easier to utilize because they can be mounted and made to look like regular directories. I would consider moving the entire “Program Files” tree to its own partition.
And you get double points if you can do this across two or more drives.
The side benefit is that a scrambled root partition should require re-imaging only the root partition, leaving all the user’s profile and other data intact in the separate partitions.
Furthermore, this will reduce the need for defragmentation, thereby giving you an additional day-to-day performance boost.
Try it on your own system. Find the 3 largest directories on your drive (e-mail? user profile? ) and segregate them into separate partitions. (FullDisk http://www.worldlynx.net/pgerhart/_fuldsk.html can help with the analysis.) It will make a big difference in your daily computing experience.
On a single user machine, this is not a requirement. It’s not a requirement in enterprise, but I think it’s better. I agree with this emailer who responded to the Lockergnome post, but I only agree in a non-multiuser environment:No, the reason that dual-partition images are old school is that two is far too few! ;-)Seriously: I’ve found that Windows machines perform FAR better when the drive is partitioned in smaller pieces. One prominent principle is that you need to keep free space near to where it will be needed. For this reason, you’ll get better performance by putting the user’s profile and major application directories on separate partitions. Partitions can still be linked (via Win2k’s path mounting) to the same place in the file tree, and can be (to neophytes) indistinguishable from directories on the C: partition.Similary, swap performance can be enhanced by giving swap its own partition near the start of the drive. (Rule of thumb: swap should be near or in the most-used partition on the least-used hard drive.) E-mail and other major applications will each benefit from having separate partitions, which are now easier to utilize because they can be mounted and made to look like regular directories. I would consider moving the entire “Program Files” tree to its own partition. And you get double points if you can do this across two or more drives.The side benefit is that a scrambled root partition should require re-imaging only the root partition, leaving all the user’s profile and other data intact in the separate partitions.Furthermore, this will reduce the need for defragmentation, thereby giving you an additional day-to-day performance boost.Try it on your own system. Find the 3 largest directories on your drive (e-mail? user profile? ) and segregate them into separate partitions. (FullDisk http://www.worldlynx.net/pgerhart/_fuldsk.html can help with the analysis.) It will make a big difference in your daily computing experience.
On a single user machine, this is not a requirement. It’s not a requirement in enterprise, but I think it’s better. I agree with this emailer who responded to the Lockergnome post, but I only agree in a non-multiuser environment:No, the reason that dual-partition images are old school is that two is far too few! ;-)Seriously: I’ve found that Windows machines perform FAR better when the drive is partitioned in smaller pieces. One prominent principle is that you need to keep free space near to where it will be needed. For this reason, you’ll get better performance by putting the user’s profile and major application directories on separate partitions. Partitions can still be linked (via Win2k’s path mounting) to the same place in the file tree, and can be (to neophytes) indistinguishable from directories on the C: partition.Similary, swap performance can be enhanced by giving swap its own partition near the start of the drive. (Rule of thumb: swap should be near or in the most-used partition on the least-used hard drive.) E-mail and other major applications will each benefit from having separate partitions, which are now easier to utilize because they can be mounted and made to look like regular directories. I would consider moving the entire “Program Files” tree to its own partition. And you get double points if you can do this across two or more drives.The side benefit is that a scrambled root partition should require re-imaging only the root partition, leaving all the user’s profile and other data intact in the separate partitions.Furthermore, this will reduce the need for defragmentation, thereby giving you an additional day-to-day performance boost.Try it on your own system. Find the 3 largest directories on your drive (e-mail? user profile? ) and segregate them into separate partitions. (FullDisk http://www.worldlynx.net/pgerhart/_fuldsk.html can help with the analysis.) It will make a big difference in your daily computing experience.
I’m here, I’m here! ;)
I’m here, I’m here! ;)
I’m here, I’m here! ;)
Oh God, there goes the neighborhood.
;)
Aaron
Oh God, there goes the neighborhood.;)Aaron
Oh God, there goes the neighborhood.;)Aaron
Yay I’m in a crew.
Of course you can’t be in the crew if you like xbox better than ps2 ;)
Yay I’m in a crew.Of course you can’t be in the crew if you like xbox better than ps2 ;)
Yay I’m in a crew.Of course you can’t be in the crew if you like xbox better than ps2 ;)