Best FD-ISR Placement To Dual Partition

Discussion in 'FirstDefense-ISR Forum' started by EASTER, Oct 20, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,633
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    Sound and useful advice here, always. :)

    I was curious on another matter myself and in keeping with the spirit of another somewhat similar topic i decided instead of swaying OT to open this one.

    I routinely keep 2 disks for the same purposes of using one to store archives but only recently brought out some drives from cold storage that i have split (partitioned) into 2.

    Now mind you i focus and specialize in malware research not drive technicalities per say (although i'm climbing the ladder nicely LoL) and so the reason for a couple of questions.

    Ok, to give you an idea of what leads up to my interest in this, as mentioned there are 2 partitions to a single drive, however, ONLY ON ONE partition is FD-ISR + it's snapshots, the other one is not installed with FD-ISR but independent. I added an extra line (partition)(1)(2) to the BOOT.INI to both in order to dual boot between partitions which works with ease.

    My questions don't exactly concern archives although i use the non-FD-ISR system as the collection/receiving point for FD-ISR .arx's in the other one.

    #1 IF you defrag say in the non-FD-ISR partition, will the defrag ignore the other partition WITH fd-isr? Or will it defrag the entire drive, partitions and all. Reason i ask is i don't defrag much that often but when i do i use strickly DiskTrix's UD that is really served me well. I do exclude the archives folder when defragging for safety.

    #2 Now to this question. The disc platter is a circle (of course) sandwiched on both sides of it are the read/write arms (i assume). If you are duplicating my method which of the 2 partitions that you desire to run FD-ISR on stand a better chance at performance with least drag or delay, the outer rim or inner rim?

    The inner rim is smaller diameter and might stand to reason? would revolve fastest whereas the outer rim, just like an orbit, has more real estate to cross to complete it's full circle or pass (revolutions).

    On simple observation (looking under the hood/lid :D ) it appears to me the platter disc which accummalates our electronic/magnetic data would perform best where the turns are the least and grow outward, but i read just the opposite in some sites. They say the best is from the outer rim working inward toward the spool or pivot.

    As a side note of concern, i still cannot explain to this day why CHKDSK one day fudged all my archives once. After it ran it scrambled them so bad i had to dump them and recreate/Copy all over again. This issue is not since been repeated btw.
    However i don't defrag any partition housing FD-ISR archives at all and i learned also not to jump the gun with RegCleaners either. :blink:
     
  2. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,047
    Hi Easter

    With Perfect Disk it see's partitions as separate disks and only defrags the one specified.

    If I understand correctly, best performance will be at the rim, as the heads have to travel to the center. With new disks, I wonder if you could measure the difference.

    Pete
     
  3. munckman

    munckman Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Posts:
    100
    Easter this is not the case. It is just the opposite. The "outer rim" travels more distance in the same revolution. The rpm is constant. So therefore, the outer rim is faster because the outer travels more distance than the inner in the same amount of time. ;)

    edit Maybe this will show it better http://partition.radified.com/ taken from page 2

    Talking about a hardrive - "In this case - that of a 120-GB IBM 120GXP, the transfer rate is roughly 50MB/s at the outer edge. But it's less than half that, or ~20MB/s, at the inner tracks. This is because the linear velocity of the discs are faster at the *outer* tracks.

    If you've ever played on a merry-go-round, you understand this concept. You move much faster standing at the outer edge, compared to the center. You will find that most hard drives, regardless of size, exhibit similar performance characteristics (faster near the outer-beginning, slower at the inner-end).

    Faster linear velocity means that more data passes under the read/write heads per unit time. This is another way of saying higher data transfer rate (which is simply another way of saying 'faster')."
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2007
  4. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,633
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    OK, thanks, i buy that :cool:

    So we draw a straight line from it's pivot point to anyplace beyond that origin and irregardless, BOTH turn at equal time only the outer edge or rim is made the longer orbit, :blink: so i assume with that then theres more area for data to be read/wrote by the drive heads there then the smaller amount found at the center.

    WHEW! Another lesson in Physics to get a grip on.

    Thanks for the answers because it was beginning to Dunce me :D
     
  5. munckman

    munckman Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Posts:
    100
    Hi Easter,

    Yes, it can be said that the outer edge reads/writes more data than the inner edge in the same amount of time (One revolution or orbit). Another way to think of it would be that the outer edge can read/write the same amount of data as the inner edge but in less time. :)

    It looks you posted right after I edited my post. So just in case, the above Radified link has a good info on Partitioning with respect to:

    Drive's effective access time
    Separate system partition from data
    Defragging
    Imaging
    Multi-Boot
    Security

    The main site has lots of Guides and Articles on many subjects that I find useful. http://radified.com/index2.html
     
  6. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,633
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    I see them both now, whereas i must have overlooked it in the above previous reply, but thanks for passing that along for us.

    I think that the rest of my drive geometry concerns might be at some risk of reprimand howbeit reasonable per our Mod's adherence to keeping topics on track if i sway too far OT, but pertaining to the HD's circumference or circle; it's my intention to strategically place all system data in the most choice of arrangement via Ultimate Defrag 1.69 which just upgraded again. LoL

    I hope to position FD-ISR and every file associated with it (including snapshots) as close to the highest performing sections/track and nearest the MFT as possible. It's been said to omit the $ISR directory to avoid potential issues, but it's the only way i know of which UD will move all to their best performing locations. After that, then theres a useful setting to further EXCLUDE $ISR/snapshots anymore from future defrags. I think as long as you can also select as many directly related dependencies files connected with Windows in this same scheme, then once the strategic placement defrag is completed, everything should remain fairly well in place for a reasonable length of PC useage before having to resort them again at a later date, hopefully.

    Now Back OT
    In a dual partition scenario which i make a lot of normal use of anymore, should one decide to install FD-ISR again, it would be more reliable and quicker on performance to place it on the first (outermost) partition for best results then. That much i understand now will also make the most use of the High Performance feature in UD.

    FD-ISR w/ Freeze Storage program unlocks a whole spread of possibilities so i want to compliment those program abilities to their fullest.

    Thanks Again

    EASTER
     
  7. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,047
    Easter, one thing to keep in mind. FDISR has to be on the system partition, the c: drive.

    Pete
     
  8. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,633
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    Got it. :) Thanks

    It's kind of like Returnil in that it functions strickly within the boundary of the C:\ system ONLY and no further beyond that.

    Being pressed along by ErikAlbert's continuous quest for perfection i not only am aiming for precise placement of FD-$ISR but am moving ahead even further for the Ultimate preventions against anything including Windows itself.
    I want to know and have a daily Logged Report of every single activity being written in the system and make an inventory of that, database if you will. Windows is so chalked full of files and many of them are either receiving signals or sending them via programs and the like, i now have employed the services of the old abandoned freeware FileChangeAlarm which you can set ALL associations including .dat,.tmp,.vbs, etc. to be monitored with no system drain at all, and FileChangeAlarm will right-at-once immediately ALERT/LOG any actions including Attribute/Date changes to any files via an audible tone & blinking tray icon; in other words no pop up boxes most find irratating. At the end of the day you can review the stats since it auto-saves the reports (timestamped) and all.
    This might be something for Erik to look at if he's interested in pinpointing activity.
    Of course it lacks with respect to carrying out any blocking procedures but other programs are better designed for those duties. This one just keeps you abreast in Real-Time of certain movements going on in your system you might not even be aware of at any time.

    Another abandoned freeware in which i find still quite useful is Process Logger which not only logs just processes but also keeps a running tally of each one's activity duration as well as CPU percentage useage and the like. It even produces a weekly chart.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.