How many Files/Folders/GB are on your Hard Drive(s)?

[KvHagedorn]

Right.. beat this for a "Height of Boredom" thread.

C,D,and E are on a 73GB Cheetah, and H is on a 36GB Cheetah.

C:
55,898 Files
608 Folders
3.43 GB

D:
30,156 Files
1133 Folders
10.2 GB

E:
228,278 Files
2077 Folders
35.4 GB

H:
103,530 Files
1418 Folders
14.3 GB

Total:
417,862 Files
5236 Folders
63.33 GB

[Gurm]

I refuse to participate in this other than to point out that your entire system would run like 25+% faster if you stopped partitioning your drives like that.

- Gurm

[Jon P. Inghram]

C: Western Digital Caviar -- WD400BB 40 gig
61238 files
6645 directories
13980.23 MB used / 12194.72 MB free

D: Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 5120 -- 91024U4 10 gig
11756 files
3225 directories
6491.09 MB used / 3187.05 MB free

E: WinXP partition on the 40 gig drive that somehow managed to kill itself, havn't gotten around to reinstalling

[KvHagedorn]

Originally posted by Gurm
I refuse to participate in this other than to point out that your entire system would run like 25+% faster if you stopped partitioning your drives like that.

- Gurm

Oh, well.. I don't really notice it, and there's another system dedicated to speed.

[Gurm]

I've just never seen the point to partitioning. *shrug*

It seems like a needless piece of abstraction. Kinda like those on-the-fly disc compressors back in the day. Just one more thing to go wrong...

- Gurm

[The PIT]

Originally posted by Gurm
I've just never seen the point to partitioning. *shrug*

It seems like a needless piece of abstraction. Kinda like those on-the-fly disc compressors back in the day. Just one more thing to go wrong...

- Gurm

Apart from going to sleep while defragging or running scandisk I think large partitions are great.

[Jammrock]

Originally posted by Gurm
I've just never seen the point to partitioning. *shrug*

It seems like a needless piece of abstraction. Kinda like those on-the-fly disc compressors back in the day. Just one more thing to go wrong...

- Gurm

I've been a partitioner for many a year now without an issue. If you partition properly you actually speeds things up quite a bit vs. a single partition per disc solution. I suppose it depends on how quickly your data changes, but my system has always run smooth and stable as can be with my dual drive, 5-6 partition system.

Overall, I have 200 GB on 2 drives, and use about ... 125+ GB of it. My home computer is packed away from the move and won't power on again until my office is finished.

Jammrock

[GuchiGuh]

17.5 GB
46.665 Files
2.818 Folders

[Gurm]

I fail to see any situation in which making the drive head seek from one end of the drive to the other repeatedly makes things go "faster".

- Gurm

[GT98]

I have 120GB storage on 2 60 WD HDD on a RAID 0 config...no idea how much space I have left or how many folders...I'm at work now

[DGhost]

C:
18.8GB
77,806 Files, 2,936folders

Network file server storage drive:
54GB
35,864 files, 2,759 folders

[Nowhere]

C and D are on Maxtor d740x 60gb (which will fail soon probably...currently working in slowest pio mode)
C:
50 184 files
2 288 folders
all that in size of 16,7 GB
total partition size 17,5 GB

D:
18 413 files
1680 folders
this has 38,1 GB
total partition size 38,3 GB

and there's this almost dead Fujitsu 15 GB drive with three partitions (something like 8, 3 and 3 GB; the first one's almost dead)...I must someday get all data that survived...unlucky I guess

Gurm, you can for example see with benchmarking tool/on some site to which point your hdd is very fast - to that point you'll have a system/demandind aplications partition and further on disk you'll have storage partition.
Not to mention that it is a must when you have one hdd...

edit: as for what they're for...
C: system, swap, games, applications, documents, some mess here and there
D: storage - mess everywere

[Jammrock]

Originally posted by Gurm
I fail to see any situation in which making the drive head seek from one end of the drive to the other repeatedly makes things go "faster".

- Gurm

LOL ... that only happens if you don't do it right. It's a whole hell of a lot easier to track 125 GB of data on multiple partitions.

C: - OS and basic apps
D: - Music. Keeps the ever changing library of music away from the rest of the data, as to not quickly fragment the drive(s).
E: - Video. Very large video files which can break up into lots of little fragments when too much other data is stored on it.
F: - Games.
G: - Scratch. Seperate Partition for Photoshop and various other video and photo editors scratch files.
H: - Pagefile.

Video, Music, scratch and pagefile partitions are on the secondary 120 GB drive. OS, Music and Games on the main 80 GB drive. That leaves the swap file seperate from the OS and Games so I can have 2 hdd's pulling data during heavy work. Works a lot faster than single drive confirgurations in my experience.

Jammrock

[KeiFront]

I've got the impression that partitioning a hd increases performance (although slightly).
It makes it easier to organize your data/programs. Also defragging gets easier, a small partition can be defragged much faster than one big one. It's easy to create ghost images. etc ...

2 Hard disks, 8 partitions in Windows, 3 in Linux:
C: 18485 files, 5,23Gb
D: 11 files 1.09Gb
E: 8857 files 2.85Gb
F: 18348 files 14.1Gb
G: 3333 files 16.5Gb
H: 24 files 0.6Gb
I: 5402 files 19.4Gb
J: 26 files 3.15 Gb
Linux partitions ? files ? Gb

[KvHagedorn]

My partitions are a bit simpler:

C: Operating System
D: Applications
E: Files and other things which will not be accessed constantly