Okay, apparently you don't understand the benefics of partitions. I'll get you the original APS Technology and LaCie files that describes all this, if I can find them. But first, go read this article, from the CERN in Geneva :
"Another reason to have multiple partitions is the security against computer crashes. For example, if the system crashes in such a way that the FAT table get corrupted, access to all your files will be lost, because the FAT table tells where each file is located on the disk. The FAT table is so important that it was decided to keep two copies of it at the beginning of the disk. For very valuable files, it might even be wise to create a second partition (then it will have its own FAT) and keep copies of important files there."
You may replace the FAT word for any other HD hierarchy file system.
Some apps, Netscape for example, are using an invisible file for temporary storage. It often happens that Netscape crash, without having time to clear its file, which is then corrupted. This my degenerate to HD corruptions (I have experienced this at work, several times with an old iMac). When it happens (rarelly), you may end with the necessity to reformat the drive and all files are then lost. You can protect yourself with a second partition to store your important files, if you don't have a second HD. Of course, back up is fondamental here, but it is not the point.
Most sites talking about partitions talk about PC systems or old OS, but it also concern Macs with OS X, for obvious reasons. You may also look at these sites :
"If you follow the default installation of Mac OSX server version10, you end up with ONE partition containing both server software and user data.
It's probably sensible to partition your drive.
I suggest a partition for Mac OSX server - an optional partition containing Mac OS 9.1 (and maybe any applications you wish to serve) - and a partition for the user directories.
Why is partitioning a good idea?
*\tIt's never a good idea to let your server system volume fill up completely (UNIX generally doesn't like it) - so moving user directories to another volume is probably a good idea
*\tThere is no swap partition on OSX - I guess there's a very big swap file somewhere on the server system volume. If this volume gets fragmented, then accessing the swap file will theoretically be slower.
*\tIf you ever need to reinstall OSX server - you know that user data is safe on a separate volume. "
"Other potential advantages provided by hard drive partitioning are slightly faster drive access, because the drive heads don't have to traverse as far to find a file within a smaller volume, and enhanced organization, for people who like to keep one kind of file -- say documents -- in one drive partition and applications in another.
Also, should one partition become corrupted, the possibility exists that the other partition or partitions may not be damaged, and data on them will be recoverable."
"Partitioning drives is a topic of much dispute, endless heated-debate, and can appear quite daunting to a new Mac owner.
Some Mac enthusiasts even see little benefit to using partitions because they feel it takes too long to configure, or believe it no longer provides appreciable benefit under the Modern Mac OS. Others are just lazy, or of a different mindset, and don't like a lot of volumes lying around to be cared for. The irony is, partitioning reduces that need for care, and indeed still provides much benefit, especially under the Modern Mac OS with larger drives."
[quote]* It's never a good idea to let your server system volume fill up completely (UNIX generally doesn't like it) - so moving user directories to another volume is probably a good idea<hr></blockquote>
This is only important on multi-user systems where the sum of all individual user quotas is more than available HDD space (most admins don't expect everybody to use up his quota.)
[quote]* There is no swap partition on OSX - I guess there's a very big swap file somewhere on the server system volume. If this volume gets fragmented, then accessing the swap file will theoretically be slower.<hr></blockquote>
The swap files are limited to 80 MB in size each. The speed difference is negligible and the hassle of customizing the location of your swap files is more than I am willing to deal with even though I know exactly how to do it. Both common methods of moving swap in OS X have flaws, BTW. The fstab method in particular is one I *hate.*
[quote]* If you ever need to reinstall OSX server - you know that user data is safe on a separate volume. "<hr></blockquote>
Always back-up before you do something you think might erase important data. Reinstalling OS X Server is no different.
[quote]Other potential advantages provided by hard drive partitioning are slightly faster drive access, because the drive heads don't have to traverse as far to find a file within a smaller volume, and enhanced organization, for people who like to keep one kind of file -- say documents -- in one drive partition and applications in another.<hr></blockquote>
This is false convenience. I wager in *real* life partitioning slows you down as a Mac user. when you move files across partitions, you end up leaving a copy behind. You have to manually trash the old file. When you move stuff across partitions in Mac OS you always copy instead of move.
[quote]Also, should one partition become corrupted, the possibility exists that the other partition or partitions may not be damaged, and data on them will be recoverable.<hr></blockquote>
How does this help someone like me who backs up all his data frequently?
[quote]Some Mac enthusiasts even see little benefit to using partitions because they feel it takes too long to configure, or believe it no longer provides appreciable benefit under the Modern Mac OS. Others are just lazy, or of a different mindset, and don't like a lot of volumes lying around to be cared for. The irony is, partitioning reduces that need for care, and indeed still provides much benefit, especially under the Modern Mac OS with larger drives.<hr></blockquote>
Like I illustrated above, I'm less lazy than someone who might have the unfortunate luck of having to rescue data from his uncorrupted partitions. I also don't find it more convenient that I have to trash old files when I move files across partitions.
I make back up almost all days. For me, it has nothing to do with the partition strategy.
Yes, partition can accelerate a bit HD access. I know, because I have experimented this many times and I saw the difference.
It also depends on the way you manage your files. I don't move files that much from one partition to another. Usually, I'm working on a partition and stay in it, because each of my partition are specialised. Only files (documents) on one partition, only apps on another, etc. Partitions are very efficient for me, much more to organise and manage my files than having only one huge space. And I feel very secure about my documents (which are more important than the apps or the OS). Partitions literally "saved my life" in the past, because of corruption made by some *(&?%$ app, or because of a computer crash !
Personnaly, I don't see ANY drawback to partitions. The documents size doesn't matter to me (I don't do video).
<strong>How do we paste any picture in this forum, anyway ?</strong><hr></blockquote>You don't. You upload them to some other server, such as an iDisk, and use this syntax in your message, changing the < and >'s to [ and ]'s.
Comments
Alpha - Primary HDD (120 GB)
Bravo - Second internal HDD (80 GB)
Charlie - External mirror of Alpha (120 GB)
Delta - Second external HDD (80 GB)
Echo - iPod (20 GB)
<a href="http://consult.cern.ch/cnl/236/disk_partition.html"; target="_blank">http://consult.cern.ch/cnl/236/disk_partition.html</a>;
Just an extract :
"Another reason to have multiple partitions is the security against computer crashes. For example, if the system crashes in such a way that the FAT table get corrupted, access to all your files will be lost, because the FAT table tells where each file is located on the disk. The FAT table is so important that it was decided to keep two copies of it at the beginning of the disk. For very valuable files, it might even be wise to create a second partition (then it will have its own FAT) and keep copies of important files there."
You may replace the FAT word for any other HD hierarchy file system.
Some apps, Netscape for example, are using an invisible file for temporary storage. It often happens that Netscape crash, without having time to clear its file, which is then corrupted. This my degenerate to HD corruptions (I have experienced this at work, several times with an old iMac). When it happens (rarelly), you may end with the necessity to reformat the drive and all files are then lost. You can protect yourself with a second partition to store your important files, if you don't have a second HD. Of course, back up is fondamental here, but it is not the point.
Most sites talking about partitions talk about PC systems or old OS, but it also concern Macs with OS X, for obvious reasons. You may also look at these sites :
<a href="http://wks.uts.ohio-state.edu/sysadm_course/html/sysadm-33.html#HEADING33-0"; target="_blank">http://wks.uts.ohio-state.edu/sysadm_course/html/sysadm-33.html#HEADING33-0</a>;
<a href="http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/hd-partn.htm"; target="_blank">http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/hd-partn.htm</a>;
<a href="http://www.infinisource.com/techfiles/partitn.html"; target="_blank">http://www.infinisource.com/techfiles/partitn.html</a>;
<a href="http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/partitions/partition_types-2.html"; target="_blank">http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/partitions/partition_types-2.html</a>;
[ 08-31-2002: Message edited by: Kali ]</p>
<a href="http://pages.unisonfree.net/mswift/osx/11partition.html"; target="_blank">http://pages.unisonfree.net/mswift/osx/11partition.html</a>;
Here's an extract :
"If you follow the default installation of Mac OSX server version10, you end up with ONE partition containing both server software and user data.
It's probably sensible to partition your drive.
I suggest a partition for Mac OSX server - an optional partition containing Mac OS 9.1 (and maybe any applications you wish to serve) - and a partition for the user directories.
Why is partitioning a good idea?
*\tIt's never a good idea to let your server system volume fill up completely (UNIX generally doesn't like it) - so moving user directories to another volume is probably a good idea
*\tThere is no swap partition on OSX - I guess there's a very big swap file somewhere on the server system volume. If this volume gets fragmented, then accessing the swap file will theoretically be slower.
*\tIf you ever need to reinstall OSX server - you know that user data is safe on a separate volume. "
Check also this page :
<a href="http://www.lowendmac.com/misc/2k0719.html"; target="_blank">http://www.lowendmac.com/misc/2k0719.html</a>;
Extract :
"Other potential advantages provided by hard drive partitioning are slightly faster drive access, because the drive heads don't have to traverse as far to find a file within a smaller volume, and enhanced organization, for people who like to keep one kind of file -- say documents -- in one drive partition and applications in another.
Also, should one partition become corrupted, the possibility exists that the other partition or partitions may not be damaged, and data on them will be recoverable."
Also this page :
<a href="http://www.thefunplace.com/anykey/machdpart.html"; target="_blank">http://www.thefunplace.com/anykey/machdpart.html</a>;
And finally THIS page :
<a href="http://sciencequest.org/support/computers/mac/topics/partitioning.html"; target="_blank">http://sciencequest.org/support/computers/mac/topics/partitioning.html</a>;
Extract :
"Partitioning drives is a topic of much dispute, endless heated-debate, and can appear quite daunting to a new Mac owner.
Some Mac enthusiasts even see little benefit to using partitions because they feel it takes too long to configure, or believe it no longer provides appreciable benefit under the Modern Mac OS. Others are just lazy, or of a different mindset, and don't like a lot of volumes lying around to be cared for. The irony is, partitioning reduces that need for care, and indeed still provides much benefit, especially under the Modern Mac OS with larger drives."
This is only important on multi-user systems where the sum of all individual user quotas is more than available HDD space (most admins don't expect everybody to use up his quota.)
[quote]* There is no swap partition on OSX - I guess there's a very big swap file somewhere on the server system volume. If this volume gets fragmented, then accessing the swap file will theoretically be slower.<hr></blockquote>
The swap files are limited to 80 MB in size each. The speed difference is negligible and the hassle of customizing the location of your swap files is more than I am willing to deal with even though I know exactly how to do it. Both common methods of moving swap in OS X have flaws, BTW. The fstab method in particular is one I *hate.*
[quote]* If you ever need to reinstall OSX server - you know that user data is safe on a separate volume. "<hr></blockquote>
Always back-up before you do something you think might erase important data. Reinstalling OS X Server is no different.
[quote]Other potential advantages provided by hard drive partitioning are slightly faster drive access, because the drive heads don't have to traverse as far to find a file within a smaller volume, and enhanced organization, for people who like to keep one kind of file -- say documents -- in one drive partition and applications in another.<hr></blockquote>
This is false convenience. I wager in *real* life partitioning slows you down as a Mac user. when you move files across partitions, you end up leaving a copy behind. You have to manually trash the old file. When you move stuff across partitions in Mac OS you always copy instead of move.
[quote]Also, should one partition become corrupted, the possibility exists that the other partition or partitions may not be damaged, and data on them will be recoverable.<hr></blockquote>
How does this help someone like me who backs up all his data frequently?
[quote]Some Mac enthusiasts even see little benefit to using partitions because they feel it takes too long to configure, or believe it no longer provides appreciable benefit under the Modern Mac OS. Others are just lazy, or of a different mindset, and don't like a lot of volumes lying around to be cared for. The irony is, partitioning reduces that need for care, and indeed still provides much benefit, especially under the Modern Mac OS with larger drives.<hr></blockquote>
Like I illustrated above, I'm less lazy than someone who might have the unfortunate luck of having to rescue data from his uncorrupted partitions. I also don't find it more convenient that I have to trash old files when I move files across partitions.
T.M.A.-1
Odyssey
Monolith
Aries
after one of the greatest films ever.
- T.I.
Hobbiton (Jag)
Rivendel (OS9)
Lothlorien (OS10.1 - SOON TO BE WIPED)
Minas Tirith (40 Gigs for Audio)
Firewire (40 gig) 2 partitions
Bag End
Orthanc
No prizes for guessing my fav books/films
Yes, partition can accelerate a bit HD access. I know, because I have experimented this many times and I saw the difference.
It also depends on the way you manage your files. I don't move files that much from one partition to another. Usually, I'm working on a partition and stay in it, because each of my partition are specialised. Only files (documents) on one partition, only apps on another, etc. Partitions are very efficient for me, much more to organise and manage my files than having only one huge space. And I feel very secure about my documents (which are more important than the apps or the OS). Partitions literally "saved my life" in the past, because of corruption made by some *(&?%$ app, or because of a computer crash !
Personnaly, I don't see ANY drawback to partitions. The documents size doesn't matter to me (I don't do video).
My 30GB drive is: Immigrant
What icons are you using for your HD or partitions ?
How do we paste any picture in this forum, anyway ?
Main 60GB HD: Disco Drive
2nd 40GB HD: Dumb Sidekick
Firewire 120GB HD for video: Pornstar :eek:
Peacr
<strong>How do we paste any picture in this forum, anyway ?</strong><hr></blockquote>You don't. You upload them to some other server, such as an iDisk, and use this syntax in your message, changing the < and >'s to [ and ]'s.
<img>http://homepage.mac.com/username/.Pictures/some-picture.jpg</img>
Litt'l Cray (80GB)
Made the icon in 6th grade
Brace with me here...for the first time in four long years I am changing the name of my hard drive...
To Korpio.
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />