| 1 |
Am Fri, 2 Sep 2016 01:53:31 +0200 |
| 2 |
schrieb Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 01/09/2016 10:49, gevisz wrote: |
| 5 |
> > 2016-09-01 10:30 GMT+03:00 Matthias Hanft <mh@×××××.de>: |
| 6 |
> >> gevisz wrote: |
| 7 |
> [...] |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> If your filesystem becomes corrupt (and you are unable to |
| 10 |
> >> repair it), *all* of your data is lost (instead of just |
| 11 |
> >> one partition). That's the only disadvantage I can think |
| 12 |
> >> of. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > That is exactly what I am afraid of! |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > So, the 20-years old rule of thumb is still valid. :( |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> No, it is not valid, and it is not true. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Data corruption on-disk does not by and large (unless you are very |
| 21 |
> unlucky) corrupt file systems. It corrupts files. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Secondly, by and large, most people have all the files they really |
| 24 |
> care about on one partition, called DATA or similar. Everything else |
| 25 |
> except your data can usually be reconstructed, especially the OS |
| 26 |
> itself. You probably store all that data in one volume simply because |
| 27 |
> it makes logical sense to do so. Data is read and written far more |
| 28 |
> than anything else on your disk so if you are unlucky enough to |
| 29 |
> suffer volume corruption it's likely to be on a) the biggest volume |
| 30 |
> and b) the busiest volume. In both cases it is your data, meaning |
| 31 |
> your data is what is exposed to risk and everything else not so much. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
This is one of the best points, and very easy to follow. *thumbsup* |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> Yes, this is a real factor you mention. It is detectable and |
| 36 |
> measureable. It's also minute and statistically irrelevant if you |
| 37 |
> haven't dealt with environmental factors that cause data damage |
| 38 |
> (dodgy ram, cables, psus, over-temps, brownouts). If those things |
| 39 |
> happen, and they WILL happen, you are 10-20 times at least more |
| 40 |
> likely to lose your data than anything else, no matter how you |
| 41 |
> partitioned the disk. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
So you can store everything in the same partition anyways. Especially |
| 44 |
since Windows doesn't have this distinction that all data should be |
| 45 |
where the user thinks it is (on "DATA or similar"). So an important part |
| 46 |
of your data is still on the OS drive anyways. Instead, make a backup |
| 47 |
of the complete user profile. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
But one should take into account: Not only the data has value. Also the |
| 50 |
work needed to reconstruct the OS and applications has value. So better |
| 51 |
put it in the backup, too. One more point for using one partition. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
-- |
| 54 |
Regards, |
| 55 |
Kai |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Replies to list-only preferred. |
Archives