Partition Recovery

[x] means Drive is assigned letter "x".

My 250GB HDD had 2 primary partitions (30GB[c],10GB[d]) and 3 logical (50GB[m],5GB(free space),80GB[t],50GB[v]). I tried to create a new 2GB partition from 5GB free between 50GB[m] and 80GB[t] partition. Windows crashed and now only first 3 partitions are visible (30gb[c],10gb[d], 50gb[m]). When i open disk manager, i see 1st 3 partitions, then there is 2GB partition[the one i tried to create], 130.63GB FREE and 284.99 GB primary partition [file system isn't mentioned].

Paragon partition manager lists different partition:

30GB[c],10GB[d],730GB [unallocated], 50GB[m], 180GB[Logical partition].

I have started scanning 730GB partition [unallocated space] to undelete partitions [it found all 3 partitions]. I have enough space on another HDD to create image of this HDD, but it will take 4+hrs to create that. Is it wise to undelete these partitions through Paragon ? or should i create an image of disk before doing that ?

Why so complicated? Why so many partitions?

Remember the rule: Keep.It.Simple.Stupid = K.I.S.S.

Create only two partitions, one for Operating System and second for everything else. Use folders to manage your files.

I read an article on MSDN from Windows 7 development team. They researched on fragmentation in data on harddisk and when data is defragmentated to 64MB of chunks then it has optimal speed in current technology of harddisks (using NTFS).

Therefore, so many complicated partitions are unnecessary unless you have multiple Operating Systems in your computer.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

Why so complicated? Why so many partitions?

Remember the rule: Keep.It.Simple.Stupid = K.I.S.S.

Create only two partitions, one for Operating System and second for everything else. Use folders to manage your files.

I read an article on MSDN from Windows 7 development team. They researched on fragmentation in data on harddisk and when data is defragmentated to 64MB of chunks then it has optimal speed in current technology of harddisks (using NTFS).

Therefore, so many complicated partitions are unnecessary unless you have multiple Operating Systems in your computer.

[/quote]

probably 64kb chunks right?

Anyway I agree that you shouldn’t partition your hard disk unless you want to dual boot or multiple boot different Operating Systems.

The main reason is that in future as your partitions become filled up with files they will become difficult to defragment and file fragmentation will slow down your computer. Windows has this crazy requirement that the partition to defragment has to have 15% free space. So its better to have one large partition. Its easier to manage too.

wampyr & rokra is right,dont make many partitions just 2,one for OS and 2nd for data and if u want to run multipl OS then make different partition for different OS,

anyway u can recover ur partition with Norton PartitionMagic

Yeah, I guess it was 64kb chunk. Don't remember exactly, it has been a while that I read that article. But the point is that you don't have to worry about harddisk speed due to fragmentation of data on very large partition (like 500GB partition).

We can make partitions for categorization too. Its not restricted to dual or tri boot systems only. What will you do if your windows got really messed up by a virus or malware and you need to format your hard disk as your last stand? So keeping a separate partition for OSes and DATA is the best scenario.

4 partitions are more than enough.

Fragmentation is unavoidable!! Whether using a single partition or multiple

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

We can make partitions for categorization too. Its not restricted to dual or tri boot systems only. What will you do if your windows got really messed up by a virus or malware and you need to format your hard disk as your last stand? So keeping a separate partition for OSes and DATA is the best scenario.

4 partitions are more than enough.

Fragmentation is unavoidable!! Whether using a single partition or multiple

[/quote]

Two partitions are enough. That’s what I am using on all of my computers from last (more than) 10 years.

First partition for operating system, second partition for everything else.

I have used this two partition strategy on Windows 9x/NT4/2000/XP/Vista and *nux.

In the era of Windows 3.1 and DOS, I used to have only one partition (to hold both OS and data).

I see no reason to have 4 or more partitions.

However, on my workstation (my power machine), I do have RAID 0 partition dedicated to Page File and Temporary Files Folders. But the purpose for these kind of partition is totally different (no data is stored in them and they are easily format-able) and normal users don’t use it.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

Two partitions are enough. That’s what I am using on all of my computers from last (more than) 10 years.

First partition for operating system, second partition for everything else.

I have used this two partition strategy on Windows 9x/NT4/2000/XP/Vista and *nux.

In the era of Windows 3.1 and DOS, I used to have only one partition (to hold both OS and data).

I see no reason to have 4 or more partitions.

However, on my workstation (my power machine), I do have RAID 0 partition dedicated to Page File and Temporary Files Folders. But the purpose for these kind of partition is totally different (no data is stored in them and they are easily format-able) and normal users don’t use it.

[/quote]

Dude why are we fighting on the number of partitions? There is no white paper or research paper regarding number of partitions, we can have as many partitions as we want thats why Major Oses support multiple partitions. It solely depends on personal use. I use WinXP + Ubuntu + Win 2k3 and i dont want a VM to run those, so 4 partitions suits my need :)

If anyone know any link that lists advantages of using 1 or 2 partitions only, please provide it.

In my opinion, It[partitioning] depends on how you will use your HDD, i use 1 partition for OS, Important Data (~10GB),Music (i de-fragment it after filling it), Videos ( defragment it regularly), Temp [use it for downloading, encoding, editing, etc]. Keeping only two partitions is only suitable if your hard disk is not very active, my drives become very fragmented thats why i use smaller partitions, this way only 1 partition is fragmented others are fine.

You can de-fragment even when you have 1% free space with many softwares but that takes much more time.

64KB chunk size is only useful if drive contains big files, drive in which Windows is installed (small files) should use smaller size.