howtogeek at July 30th, 2013 16:01 — #1
Originally published at: http://www.howtogeek.com/166810/can-you-increase-the-reliability-of-a-hard-drive-by-using-less-of-its-total-capacity/
Your computer has a massive hard drive that you significantly underuse. Would decreasing the size of the primary partition actually increase the lifespan of the drive?
raphoenix at July 30th, 2013 16:10 — #2
Better to store important data on multiple smaller capacity HDDs than to "store all your eggs in one big basket" large capacity drive.
jimrayn0r at July 30th, 2013 17:27 — #3
If you're using 3 different physical drives, then yes. But the question was if repartitioning the same 3TB drive into 3 1TB partitions would help. and it would not. The partitions are still on the same physical drive and if it fails, all 3 partitions will fail.
ladyfitzgerald at July 30th, 2013 17:42 — #4
While reliability will be unaffected by formatting only part of a HDD, if just the outer cylinders are the ones that are formatted (a process called short-stroking), then speed will improve a bit since the heads won't have to travel as far. HDDs are so fast now, short-stroking doesn't make much sense anymore, especially since an SSD will run circles around even a short-stroked HDD.
Having a proper backup scheme in place (a minimum of one onsite and one offsite backup) would negate the danger of having all of one's data on a single HDD. Btw, RAID by itself is not a backup
raphoenix at July 30th, 2013 17:54 — #5
Having multiple HDDs or SSDs is an "Implied Backup Scheme" !! (LOL) (LOL)
riffman at July 30th, 2013 21:06 — #6
I have copies spread around each PC and on my file PC. It's a full tower w/2- 2TB and 3- 1TB. I store movies, music and programs on different HHD with at least 3 copies of everything one on original PC and then on the File PC. I won't loose anything unless someone carries of my PC's.
ladyfitzgerald at July 30th, 2013 21:23 — #7
That's why you also need an offsite backup.
raphoenix at July 30th, 2013 21:30 — #8
An Off-Site Backup is a Bank Box !!
ladyfitzgerald at July 30th, 2013 21:47 — #9
As is a paid cloud backup service, such as Carbonite.
raphoenix at July 30th, 2013 21:51 — #10
Ohhhh Nooooooo !!!!
You fell for that .........................
nanogeek at July 31st, 2013 04:25 — #11
raph, you high?
nsdcars5 at July 31st, 2013 08:04 — #12
If have a RAID 1 of two RAID 0s, how reliable are the speeds?
ladyfitzgerald at July 31st, 2013 09:07 — #13
Fell for what? Carbonite? If so, Carbonite is a perfectly good and inexpensive offsite backup solution as long as one understands its limitations (data only, slow speed, high bandwidth requirements) and uses it properly (such as not depending on it as a sole backup). Two handy things about Carbonite are 1. it automatically encrypts and uploads data starting shortly after its creation and 2. it provides 30 day versioning. The 30 day versioning feature has saved my bacon more than once when I accidentally deleted a file.
I use Carbonite to supplement the backups that I keep in a safe deposit box at my credit union (aka bank box) and to fill in the gap between local backups. That way, if I lose everything at home—the computer and the two sets of local backups—I can more quickly and more completely recover all of my data. I can get the majority of the data from the HDDs in the safe deposit box, then use Carbonite to recover the data that was changed or added after the HDDs were put into the safe deposit box. Otherwise, it would take weeks to recover all of the data. If somehow I manage to lose even the Offsite HDDs, I still should be able to get all my data back from Carbonite; it would just take one heck of a lot longer.
However, if someone is strapped for cash and can't afford the HDDs needed for proper local and offsite backups, at $59/year, using Carbonite only is better than using nothing at all.
nanogeek at July 31st, 2013 10:47 — #14
Seagate Barracuda's 1TB are $67 and WD Caviar Blue's are $59.99. Personally I would get one of these off-site, and mirror any other changes to the cloud.
williamwclee at July 31st, 2013 22:39 — #15
what if i still format the 3TB drive to its 3TB full capacity but leave 2TB "unallocated"?
so in case of emergency repair to the 1TB partition aforesaid, i can copy/backup data in the "1TB" to the "2TB" partition newly created for this repair purpose.
the rationale is that in some cases of partition errors, you might not be able to use the blank partition (if it has already been created before) but you might still be able to create partitions from "unallocated" space. Am i right?
raphoenix at July 31st, 2013 23:01 — #16
williamwclee at July 31st, 2013 23:46 — #17
thank you for your information.
i recalled that the "computer management" (control panel) actually shows a partition and two "unallocated" space blocks. Now i understand why there are two "unalllocated" blocks (among them, one is the unaccessible "unallocated" of size around 7xx GB).
But for the time being i won't bother to convert the 3TB disc from MBR to GPT 'cause i don't need the disc space beyond 2TB and the Oracle is "Don't fix what isn't broken".
nanogeek at August 1st, 2013 04:45 — #18
The 'Oracle' is : "Ruin what is good... Always we must Ask"
williamwclee at August 1st, 2013 05:03 — #19
see ya another time
doctordeere at August 1st, 2013 05:35 — #20
Or if you arrive home from work just as the fire department is putting the hoses back on the truck.
There's no substitute for offsite backups.
next page →