views:

311

answers:

9

I've got a machine I'm going to be using for development, and it has two 7200 RPM 160 GB SATA HDs in it.

The information I've found on the net so far seems to be a bit conflicted about which things (OS, Swap files, Programs, Solution/Source code/Other data) I should be installing on how many partitions on which drives to get the most benefit from this situation.

Some people suggest having a separate partition for the OS and/or Swap, some don't bother. Some people say the programs should be on the same physical drive as the OS with the data on the other, some the other way around. Same with the Swap and the OS.

I'm going to be installing Vista 64 bit as my OS and regularly using Visual Studio 2008, VMWare Workstation, SQL Server management studio, etc (pretty standard dev tools).

So I'm asking you--how would you do it?

+2  A: 

If they're both going through the same disk controller, there's not going to be much difference performance-wise no matter which way you do it; if you're going to be doing lots of VM's, I would split one drive for OS and swap / Programs and Data, then keep all the VM's on the other drive.

Having all the VM's on an independant drive would let you move that drive to another machine seamlessly if the host fails, or if you upgrade.

SqlACID
+2  A: 

If the drives support RAID configurations in your BIOS, you should do one of the following:

RAID 1 (Mirror) - Since this is a dev machine this will give you the fault tolerance and peace of mind that your code is safe (and the environment since they are such a pain to put together). You get better performance on reads because it can read from both/either drive. You don't get any performance boost on writes though.

RAID 0 - No fault tolerance here, but this is the fastest configuration because you read and write off both drives. Great if you just want as fast as possible performance and you know your code is safe elsewhere (source control) anyway.

Don't worry about mutiple partitions or OS/Data configs because on a dev machine you sort of need it all anyway and you shouldn't be running heavy multi-user databases or anything anyway (like a server).

If your BIOS doesn't support RAID configurations, however, then you might consider doing the OS/Data split over the two drives just to balance out their use (but as you mentioned, keep the programs on the system drive because it will help with caching). Up to you where to put the swap file (OS will give you dump files, but the data drive is probably less utilized).

Kevin Dostalek
PS- I consider VM's "data" as related to the host, even though they are OS drives themselves as related to the guest.
Kevin Dostalek
+1  A: 

I would suggest if 160gb total capacity will cover your needs (plenty of space for OS, Applications and source code, just depends on what else you plan to put on it), then you should mirror the drives in a RAID 1 unless you will have a server that data is backed up to, an external hard drive, an online backup solution, or some other means of keeping a copy of data on more then one physical drive.

If you need to use all of the drive capacity, I would suggest using the first drive for OS and Applications and second drive for data. Purely for the fact of, if you change computers at some point, the OS on the first drive doesn't do you much good and most Applications would have to be reinstalled, but you could take the entire data drive with you.

As for dividing off the OS, a big downfall of this is not giving the partition enough space and eventually you may need to use partitioning software to steal some space from the other partition on the drive. It never seems to fail that you allocate a certain amount of space for the OS partition, right after install you have several gigs free space so you think you are fine, but as time goes by, things build up on that partition and you run out of space.

With that in mind, I still typically do use an OS partition as it is useful when reloading a system, you can format that partition blowing away the OS but keep the rest of your data. Ways to keep the space build up from happening too fast is change the location of your my documents folder, change environment variables for items such as temp and tmp. However, there are some things that just refuse to put their data anywhere besides on the system partition. I used to use 10gb, these days I go for 20gb.

Dividing your swap space can be useful for keeping drive fragmentation down when letting your swap file grow and shrink as needed. Again this is an issue though of guessing how much swap you need. This will depend a lot on the amount of memory you have and how much stuff you will be running at one time.

ManiacZX
A: 

I would put the OS and all the applications on the first disk (1 partition). Then, put the data from the SQL server (and any other overflow data) on the second disk (1 partition). This is how I'd set up a machine without any other details about what you're building. Also make sure you have a backup so you don't lose work. It might even be worth it to mirror the two drives (if you have RAID capability) so you don't lose any progress if/when one of them fails. Also, backup to an external disk daily. The RAID won't save you when you accidentally delete the wrong thing.

JR Lawhorne
A: 

In general I'd try to split up things that are going to be doing a lot of I/O (such as if you have autosave on VS going off fairly frequently) Think of it as sort of I/O multithreading

Davy8
A: 

I've observed significant speedups by putting my virtual machines on a separate disk. Whenever Windows is doing something stupid in the VM (e.g., indexing yet again), it doesn't thrash my Mac's disk quite so badly.

Another issue is that many tools (Visual Studio comes to mind) break in frustrating ways when bits of them are on the non-primary disk.

Use your second disk for big random things.

Rich
+1  A: 

Mark one drive as being your warehouse, put all of your source code, data, assets, etc. on there and back it up regularly. You'll want this to be stable and easy to recover. You can even switch My Documents to live here if wanted.

The other drive should contain the OS, drivers, and all applications. This makes it easy and secure to wipe the drive and reinstall the OS every 18-24 months as you tend to have to do with Windows.

If you want to improve performance, some say put the swap on the warehouse drive. This will increase OS performance, but will decrease the life of the drive.

In reality it all depends on your goals. If you need more performance then you even out the activity level. If you need more security then you use RAID and mirror it. My mix provides for easy maintenance with a reasonable level of data security and minimal bit rot problems.

Your most active files will be the registry, page file, and running applications. If you're doing lots of data crunching then those files will be very active as well.

xero
+1  A: 

For the posters suggesting RAID - it's probably OK at 160GB, but I'd hesitate for anything larger. Soft errors in the drives reduce the overall reliability of the RAID. See these articles for the details:

http://alumnit.ca/~apenwarr/log/?m=200809#08 http://permabit.wordpress.com/2008/08/20/are-fibre-channel-and-scsi-drives-more-reliable/

You can't believe everything you read on the internet, but the reasoning makes sense to me.

Sorry I wasn't actually able to answer your question.

Mark Ransom
+1  A: 

I usually run a box with two drives. One for the OS, swap, typical programs and applications, and one for VMs, "big" apps (e.g., Adobe CS suite, anything that hits the disk a lot on startup, basically).

But I also run a cheap fileserver (just an old machine with a coupla hundred gigs of disk space in RAID1), that I use to store anything related to my various projects. I find this is a much nicer solution than storing everything on my main dev box, doesn't cost much, gives me somewhere to run a webserver, my personal version control, etc.

Although I admit, it really isn't doing much I couldn't do on my machine. I find it's a nice solution as it helps prevent me from spreading stuff around my workstation's filesystem at random by forcing me to keep all my work in one place where it can be easily backed up, copied elsewhere, etc. I can leave it on all night without huge power bills (it uses <50W under load) so it can back itself up to a remote site with a little script, I can connect to it from outside via SSH (so I can always SCP anything I need).

But really the most important benefit is that I store nothing of any value on my workstation box (at least nothing that isn't also on the server). That means if it breaks, or if I want to use my laptop, etc. everything is always accessible.

Dan