The Partitioning Debate

Topic

The topic of partitioning hard drives has incurred debates of epic proportions, stopping just short of open warfare in many an IT department. This article will attempt to address some of the pros and cons of partitioning, albeit written from a pro-stance (pun intended).

Debate

In a recent article at MacCentral (Ask Dr. Mac #43), a reader brings up a few of the most-common arguments against partitioning:

Point Against Point in Favor

Can be very confusing to a beginning user, because there is not one starting point. True. But let's not confuse the term 'Beginner' with 'Casual User'. While we agree that a very casual user probably doesn't need to partition, because their needs likely won't benefit enough to bother, we firmly assert that intermediate, advanced and professional users will.
If a beginner is likely to become an intermediate or advanced user with intermediate or advanced needs, why not start them out with the proper training, rather than force the need to readjust later?

Besides, is it really so different from a visual or basic-functionality perspective to have a bunch of primary folders inside one volume (System, Documents, Applications, Internet, etc), than it is to have those divisions displayed on the Desktop?

If you run out of room on one partition,
you get to start over or just place this "one" application with your documents. True. And if you run out of room on your single hard drive, you have to buy another one. It's really six of one, and half a dozen of another. Clearly, partitioning requires some thought for the future, as does your inititial decision on what size of a hard drive to buy. If you underestimate your needs, you will have to make changes; be it on one partition on one drive, or multiple partitions on multiple drives. And whoo can predict how much space one will need in even just two years?

As a hard disk gets full it becomes easier to fragment.

Partitioning increases the likelihood of severe fragmentation. True, but only in the context of files that are likely to fragment.
Installed applications (unless modified) aren't likely to fragment, nor are fonts, clipart, ReadMe files, user manuals, help files, and tons of other things the typical user stores on a computer.

By partitioning off files that rarely change, and keeping partitions that are likely to fragment separate, one can drastically reduce the amount of time it takes to correct that fragmentation; and further help insure optimisation of the hard drives.

Why constantly move files about that never change during a disk defragmentation or optimisation session? And what about file and virus inspection? Why check files that haven't changed in months, or even years? Partitioning prevents such waste.

When running DiskWarrior on a drive, you can run it once instead of once for each partition. You can utilize AppleScript, or even just Drag'n'Drop procedures, which will run DiskWarrior (and other repair utilities) on each volume without interruption.

When rebuilding the desktop you can answer the
"Are you sure you want to rebuild the desktop for disk..."
once instead of for each partition. If one utilizes the preferred, advanced method of Desktop DB/DF deletion, rather than the typical (and often misused) method of Rebuilding, no such method appears. (See: Desktop Rebuilding: The Right Way!)

It is easier to backup when every document is stored in the documents folder then across multiple partitions. If one can maintain enough discipline to keep all one's documents in one folder, one may do the same thing with a documents volume.

You never have to guess which partition a document on your desktop is on. Why guess? A 'Get Info' (Command-I) on any file, folder or volume will tell you its location. Simple rules about creating new files and folders will prevent you from creating them in the wrong (undesired) volume.

When you want to install a second OS on a machine, buy a second hard drive. They are cheap.

If you want to experiment with OS X, LinuxPPC, and BeOS, buy one large drive, and partition. This argument fails to account for the speed of different portions of hard drives; and also fails to justify the need if one already owns a large drive with plenty of space.
If one only wishes to occasionaly play with Linux, why devote an entire drive, or even devote the a small portion on the fastest part of any drive? The beauty of partitions is that they allow you to experiment and prioritize as you see fit.

Finally, not all Macs can even easily host a second hard drive, no matter how cheap. And the very concept of adding an external drive of useable speed for an OS drives the price higher (have you priced an external FireWire drive lately?)

An Invitation To Comment

As we said, this topic is open for much debate. Many of the pros are addressed in the article Partitioning Hard Drives, but we invite anyone with additional comments, pro or con, to send them to us for additional discussion.

Related Articles

Partitioning Hard Drives

Article last revised on:
Article created on: 30 April '00
Author: Frederico
Editor: Frederico

Comments or Questions? Did you find this article useful? If yes, perhaps you'd like to make a small donation.

DISCLAIMER: The information within this site is provided as a courtesy, is intended for reference use only, and SQ, its staff, partners, associates and students, nor any manufacturer named within shall be held liable for any damage caused by utilization of techniques or software named herein. Use of said information is AT YOUR OWN RISK, and no warranties of any kind are expressed or implied.

©1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Colorado Alliance for Creative Education: ScienceQuest, except where copyrights and trademarks exist as noted for third party products and related information. You may copy the contents of this section for your personal use, but you may not distribute, reprint, publish or modify without expressed, written permission. Please request permission prior to linking to this site, and provide all referring URLs.

Point Against		Point in Favor
Can be very confusing to a beginning user, because there is not one starting point.		True. But let's not confuse the term 'Beginner' with 'Casual User'. While we agree that a very casual user probably doesn't need to partition, because their needs likely won't benefit enough to bother, we firmly assert that intermediate, advanced and professional users will. If a beginner is likely to become an intermediate or advanced user with intermediate or advanced needs, why not start them out with the proper training, rather than force the need to readjust later? Besides, is it really so different from a visual or basic-functionality perspective to have a bunch of primary folders inside one volume (System, Documents, Applications, Internet, etc), than it is to have those divisions displayed on the Desktop?
If you run out of room on one partition, you get to start over or just place this "one" application with your documents.		True. And if you run out of room on your single hard drive, you have to buy another one. It's really six of one, and half a dozen of another. Clearly, partitioning requires some thought for the future, as does your inititial decision on what size of a hard drive to buy. If you underestimate your needs, you will have to make changes; be it on one partition on one drive, or multiple partitions on multiple drives. And whoo can predict how much space one will need in even just two years?
As a hard disk gets full it becomes easier to fragment. Partitioning increases the likelihood of severe fragmentation.		True, but only in the context of files that are likely to fragment. Installed applications (unless modified) aren't likely to fragment, nor are fonts, clipart, ReadMe files, user manuals, help files, and tons of other things the typical user stores on a computer. By partitioning off files that rarely change, and keeping partitions that are likely to fragment separate, one can drastically reduce the amount of time it takes to correct that fragmentation; and further help insure optimisation of the hard drives. Why constantly move files about that never change during a disk defragmentation or optimisation session? And what about file and virus inspection? Why check files that haven't changed in months, or even years? Partitioning prevents such waste.
When running DiskWarrior on a drive, you can run it once instead of once for each partition.		You can utilize AppleScript, or even just Drag'n'Drop procedures, which will run DiskWarrior (and other repair utilities) on each volume without interruption.
When rebuilding the desktop you can answer the "Are you sure you want to rebuild the desktop for disk..." once instead of for each partition.		If one utilizes the preferred, advanced method of Desktop DB/DF deletion, rather than the typical (and often misused) method of Rebuilding, no such method appears. (See: Desktop Rebuilding: The Right Way!)
It is easier to backup when every document is stored in the documents folder then across multiple partitions.		If one can maintain enough discipline to keep all one's documents in one folder, one may do the same thing with a documents volume.
You never have to guess which partition a document on your desktop is on.		Why guess? A 'Get Info' (Command-I) on any file, folder or volume will tell you its location. Simple rules about creating new files and folders will prevent you from creating them in the wrong (undesired) volume.
When you want to install a second OS on a machine, buy a second hard drive. They are cheap. If you want to experiment with OS X, LinuxPPC, and BeOS, buy one large drive, and partition.		This argument fails to account for the speed of different portions of hard drives; and also fails to justify the need if one already owns a large drive with plenty of space. If one only wishes to occasionaly play with Linux, why devote an entire drive, or even devote the a small portion on the fastest part of any drive? The beauty of partitions is that they allow you to experiment and prioritize as you see fit. Finally, not all Macs can even easily host a second hard drive, no matter how cheap. And the very concept of adding an external drive of useable speed for an OS drives the price higher (have you priced an external FireWire drive lately?)