# To partition or not to partition?



## Lode_Runner (Oct 7, 2016)

Hi everyone,

I recently bought a Western Digital Black 4TB Hard Drive to consolidate all my sample libraries down from 3 x 1TB HDDs onto one drive. The reason for this was I only had one SATA3 connection available, and I also wanted extra storage capacity for future expansion. 

Now I'm wondering should I have just the one 4TB partition or should I go for 4 x 1TB partitions? Any thoughts?


----------



## tack (Oct 7, 2016)

I'd just do one partition. Why complicate matters? Unless you want to do something like full disk encryption on one of your partitions, or had some other technical reason to partition.


----------



## Tommy-boy (Oct 7, 2016)

I would not partition a drive used for sample libraries. Can't see any upside. Downside is that libraries change size and you need to monkey with partitions down the road.
-Tom


----------



## Lode_Runner (Oct 7, 2016)

Thanks Tack and Tom. The main reasons I was thinking of doing it were a) to retain the drive letters of the previous drives, and hopefully avoid having to reset up all my Quickload shortcuts in Kontakt b) I've read that partitioned Hard Drives perform better as it reduces reading head repositioning delays (although I don't know if this applies with 4TB drives as I think they're 4 x 1TB platters stacked in the one drive case, so I think 4 x 1 TB partitions shouldn't make any difference to the positioning of the reading heads).


----------



## Lode_Runner (Oct 7, 2016)

I went ahead with the single partition. Thanks again Tack and Tom.


----------



## tack (Oct 7, 2016)

Lode_Runner said:


> to retain the drive letters of the previous drives, and hopefully avoid having to reset up all my Quickload shortcuts in Kontakt


I myself have 5 drives, between flash and spinning rust, and I solve this problem by only ever referencing one drive letter. I have my sample libraries strewn across them all of course, but I link back to all of them from a single location, and just point Kontakt etc. at that one location.

On Windows this can be done with a junction (I use the Link Shell Extension). I assume on OS X this can be accomplished with a symlink as well. (It's what I'd do on Linux anyway. I'm terribly ignorant about OS X.)



Lode_Runner said:


> I've read that partitioned Hard Drives perform better as it reduces reading head repositioning delays


I'm not sure what you're thinking of here, but if anything, it _could_ actually make things much worse. If Windows' I/O scheduler doesn't take into consideration that your multiple partitions are actually on the same physical device, then parallel I/O could do a very fine job at torturing that disk head.

The only thing I can think you might be referencing is short stroking the disk. If you under-size the disk partition so it doesn't fill up the disk then you end up avoiding the smaller inner tracks. The outer tracks have a higher density, i.e. you can read more data before the head needs to reposition, so just not using the inner tracks is a common optimization. Similar in spirit to how we used to under-partition SSDs to leave more free space for wear leveling and garbage collection (though obviously very different mechanics at play there).


----------



## Lode_Runner (Oct 7, 2016)

tack said:


> The only thing I can think you might be referencing is short stroking the disk. If you under-size the disk partition so it doesn't fill up the disk then you end up avoid the smaller inner tracks. The outer tracks have a higher density, i.e. you can read more data before the head needs to reposition, so just not using the inner tracks is a common optimization. Similar in spirit to how we used to under-partition SSDs to leave more free space for wear leveling and garbage collection (though obviously very different mechanics at play there).


Yes short stroking was what I was referencing. I've just looked up the specs of the 4TB model and it has 5 x 800GB Platters, so I don't think setting 4 x 1TB partitions would result in short stroking at all. I think I've made the right decision to just have one partition for the whole thing.


----------



## milesito (Oct 7, 2016)

1 partition for samples is good


----------



## tack (Oct 7, 2016)

Lode_Runner said:


> I've just looked up the specs of the 4TB model and it has 5 x 800GB Platters, so I don't think setting 4 x 1TB partitions would result in short stroking at all.


The drive will stripe across the platters, so in fact the lower sectors would be on the outer tracks of each of the platters. In this sense, your first partition would have been _somewhat _faster than the others -- or since we're talking about spinning rust, I'd probably say "slightly less slow."  Even in that case, four partitions would have been overkill.

But the performance gains are terribly marginal compared to the performance benefit of flash storage. So if performance is really important, investing in an SSD will pay dividends. 

I think you'll do perfectly fine with a single partition.


----------



## Lode_Runner (Oct 7, 2016)

tack said:


> the performance gains are terribly marginal compared to the performance benefit of flash storage. So if performance is really important, investing in an SSD will pay dividends.



SSD would be awesome. But for the same amount of storage it would cost me $1772 Australian as opposed to $305 the 4TB HDD cost. Also to get the maximum benefit, I'd also have to invest in a new Motherboard so I could have another SATA3 connection to work with and if I did that I'd want to add a new processor and new RAM and new cooling system etc... so basically a completely new computer in the $4000 range. I'm not doing that this year (and probably not next year), so it's one of those things that's going to sit on my wish list for a while alongside the Berlin Orchestra. The spinning rust, Albion One and Hollywood Orchestra will have to do for now.


----------



## tack (Oct 7, 2016)

Yeah, computer upgrades do tend to have an unrelenting domino effect.

It's hard keepin' up with the Joneses.


----------



## synthpunk (Oct 8, 2016)

I read that multi partitioning wears on a drives lifespan more. FYI


----------



## Tommy-boy (Oct 8, 2016)

For my audio computer, I have 5 hds (7 if you count redundant drives in raid). I dual boot with separate SSDs. One boot is for music only (no antivirus, games, nothing but music programs). Other boot is for ms office, games, surfing net, etc... One set of raided HDs is for regular data. Second set of raided HDs for music projects (not samples though). Raid is mirroring, so if one HD dies, I loose nothing. This has already saved my bacon 2 times. Then a single HD for samples. I don't raid this because if the drive dies, I won't really lose anything. I can always get another HD and reload the sample libraries. It would be a PITA, but not the end of the world. My music data HD is a regular HD, not SSD. I've never outstripped it's capability. My sample drive is a regular HD, not SSD. I've never outstripped it's capabilities either, but I admit that I don't use samples as heavily as others do. I probably work more with recorded audio and a decent collection of midi hardware. I mainly use samples for piano sounds and drums.

On a side note, ADK built this computer for me and they did an excellent job. I built my last 3 computers but had ADK build my current one as I didn't have the time to put into it. Great resource for audio computers. 

-Tom


----------



## wst3 (Oct 8, 2016)

Tom - that is an excellent configuration! I do something very similar, but I haven't gone with RAID arrays yet, I simply mirror my music data and regular data drives to external drives for quasi-redunancy. (is that a word?)

I've also stopped dual-booting with my last system build - I had boot disks for regular use, studio use, and experimenting. I also had a couple unix/Linux boot disks. Too much hassle<G>... so the studio computer is studio use only now, and I use a laptop for everything else. I do still have a PlanetCCRMA boot disk around somewhere, but really, I think I'll end up building a toy box from old parts and use that for the little experimentation I still have time for. (The real reason for an experimentation boot drive was for betas, but I don't do a lot of beta testing anymore, so I just make an image when I need to install beta software on the studio computer.)

I really need to take another look at RAID arrays...


----------



## Lode_Runner (Oct 8, 2016)

synthpunk said:


> I read that multi partitioning wears on a drives lifespan more. FYI


Thanks synthpunk, for some reason I thought it'd be the other way around (ie less movement for the reading head if accessing something from one partition)



Tommy-boy said:


> For my audio computer, I have 5 hds (7 if you count redundant drives in raid). I dual boot with separate SSDs. One boot is for music only (no antivirus, games, nothing but music programs). Other boot is for ms office, games, surfing net, etc... One set of raided HDs is for regular data. Second set of raided HDs for music projects (not samples though). Raid is mirroring, so if one HD dies, I loose nothing. This has already saved my bacon 2 times. Then a single HD for samples. I don't raid this because if the drive dies, I won't really lose anything. I can always get another HD and reload the sample libraries. It would be a PITA, but not the end of the world. My music data HD is a regular HD, not SSD. I've never outstripped it's capability. My sample drive is a regular HD, not SSD. I've never outstripped it's capabilities either, but I admit that I don't use samples as heavily as others do. I probably work more with recorded audio and a decent collection of midi hardware. I mainly use samples for piano sounds and drums.
> -Tom


Wow, that's an interesting set up Tom. I think when I do eventually get my next computer I'll definitely have to consider RAID and mirroring. My biggest fear is my hard drive failing, then going to my back up drive and finding it's no longer working, and it's a pain backing up manually. I definitely want to have SSDs for my samples eventually, not only for their better streaming but also as they're quieter (I have two new 4TB HDDs in my machine and they're both making an annoying regular clicking sound, and I don't think it's related to power supply as I have 750W while power calculators tell me I only need 460W or so).


----------



## JohnG (Oct 8, 2016)

Lode_Runner said:


> so basically a completely new computer in the $4000 range



You're getting a lot of good advice here, L-R.

As you think forward about the future, SSDs are definitely a way to improve one's setup. I don't know if you have 4TB of samples you use day in, day out, but often people have their "main" libraries -- strings and percussion, maybe -- and libraries that are not used intensively. 

While accepting that Australian prices may be much higher, for about USD$1,500 these days in the USA you can do a heck of a computer, especially if you can re-use the case and power supply. You could keep the 4TB drive and put choice libraries on SSDs. It's not "all or nothing," of course. 

For example, if you have string and brass libraries that are very demanding, you offload just those onto the SSDs. 

This may be possible even without upgrading anything; if you have a SATA II connexion, SSDs still are very usable. Doesn't have to be SATA III. I have quite a few SATA II-linked SSDs.

Good luck either way.

Kind regards,

John


----------



## JohnG (Oct 8, 2016)

Also, regarding your concern about losing the hard drive -- I am with you. Really a scary prospect.

I was recommended backup software called: AOMEI Backupper that can run automatically. I have tried many others and this is the best yet. In order to make it automatic (say, once a week or something), you would need to have a backup drive connected to your computer but it doesn't absolutely have to be internal to work. But the first backup _via_ USB 2 or less will be pretty time-consuming.

Automatic is absolutely the only really good backup system in my opinion.

John


----------



## Levitanus (Oct 8, 2016)

for my personal opinion partitions need to divide those parts which can be formated without any problems form positive information. For win it's just system partition and non-system. But since everyone has own SSD per system it isn't necessary. For Linux there're some useful options but linux works bad still with samples :( I really wait for something like kontakt only with native support without horrible vestige. Jack is almost vienna ensamble and absolutely free. And it worked once with me, just without full orchestra... Vestige crushed everything.. But it was possible to make a band 
P.S. I don't feel needles of moving every lbrary to one HDD. I have them on 3 HDDs and still don't feel necessary to buy SSD for samples


----------



## Lode_Runner (Oct 8, 2016)

JohnG said:


> Also, regarding your concern about losing the hard drive -- I am with you. Really a scary prospect.


 Now I have the new HDD, I'll be able to keep my old HDDs plus my existing back up drive, so I'll have two backups now.

I'm also really glad more and more devs are offering the ability to log into their sites and re-download when you need to - sure beats the days of 'you've got 48 hours to download or the links will expire'.



JohnG said:


> As you think forward about the future, SSDs are definitely a way to improve one's setup. I don't know if you have 4TB of samples you use day in, day out, but often people have their "main" libraries -- strings and percussion, maybe -- and libraries that are not used intensively.
> 
> While accepting that Australian prices may be much higher, for about USD$1,500 these days in the USA you can do a heck of a computer, especially if you can re-use the case and power supply. You could keep the 4TB drive and put choice libraries on SSDs. It's not "all or nothing," of course.
> 
> ...



Thanks John. I've currently got less than 3TB of samples total. I got the 4TB to give me room to grow.

Great suggestion regarding having a mix of SSD and HDD! That wouldn't just mean faster transfer rates for my main libraries, but also less wear and tear on the HDD as it'd only be accessing the lesser used libraries. That'll definitely be something for me to consider and could even be something I can do on my current computer.

I've read that HDDs aren't fast enough to take advantage of SATA III so you don't see the better speed of SATA III until you're using an SSD. So in my case I could have the SSD connected to my one available SATA III connection (I have two, but the other one is already connected to my SSD system drive) and have the 4TB HDD on a SATA II connection (I don't think I need an optical drive wasting a SATA II connection anymore anyway). The only issue is that I'd have a hard time choosing what to put on the SSD as I have multiple options for all my core sounds which I swap in and out until I find what works for the track, so it might be more of a matter of putting the resource hogs onto the SSD (eg Hollywood Orchestra - if I can stream that straight from an SSD maybe I won't need more RAM either).

I would definitely reuse my case, but not the power-supply unit. A failed PSU fried my last computer, so I don't trust keeping an old PSU on board.


Edit: Thanks also for the tip on the backup software.


----------



## JohnG (Oct 8, 2016)

Lode_Runner said:


> ...I'd have a hard time choosing what to put on the SSD...



I agree, this is a tough choice -- but there's another idea you could consider. 

*PCIe Card*

Another excellent way to expand your existing computer would be to install a PCIe card that has SATA III ports on it. Some of these are just that -- extra ports -- and some have SSDs mounted on them. I use an old OCZ model, but there are plenty of manufacturers now. Then you are really cooking with your throughput, as the PCIe bus allows blistering speed. OCZ claim 2,600 MB/s read speed for this one: https://www.ocz.com/us/ssd/rd400-ssd

*Priorities for SSD(s)*

Either way, any SSDs should hold the patches that stream the most, not necessarily those you use the most. I doubt that's super easy to work out, but it's possible to make an educated guess. 

Synths like Zebra don't stream at all, and my drums don't seem to stream that much. Some synths, like Omnisphere, do stream but their main bottleneck, if there is one, is CPU. However, Hollywood Strings notoriously uses over 10 simultaneous streams for its "powerful system" patches, so that's the first place I'd go if in fact your music uses strings very much. If you're more of a rock / contemporary composer, then the list below may not be for you. If, by contrast, you use the orchestra as your base and then add in guitars / drums /synths, I'd probably go with:

1. Strings (especially Hollywood Strings -- sound great but the most demanding library from East West by far);

2. Brass (Hollywood Brass is _far_ less demanding than HS -- no comparison); 

3. Woodwinds if you use tons of them.

I think you're right about putting the HDD on SATA II. I don't think that SATA II connection will be a bottleneck; as I said, I connect plenty of SSDs to SATA II.

With regard to some future rebuild, I also favour very high quality PSUs so I understand not wanting to risk it. And of course make sure your enclosure has plenty of air circulation.

Best of luck!

John

[note: I have received free products from East West]


----------



## Lode_Runner (Oct 8, 2016)

JohnG said:


> there's another idea you could consider.
> 
> *PCIe Card*
> 
> ...



Thanks again John. I knew about SSDs on a PCIe, but didn't pay much attention to them as they're more expensive than standard SSDs. I didn't know about the PCIe cards with extra SATA ports on them - that is a great tip - thank you.

I don't suppose there are PCIe cards for expanding RAM? According to Intel's website, my MoBo can handle up to 32 GB, but the guys at the computer store told me that in reality it won't use anywhere near that, so I'm stuck on 16GB until I upgrade my computer.

BTW, thanks for the tips regarding priorities of orchestral sections. I'm more of a rock/contemporary composer but I have a lot of influence from romantic/early 20th Century orchestral music (along with reggae/dub, ambient electronic music, medieval/renaissance music, West African music, Turkish/Arabian/Iranian music, Japanese music...)


----------



## JohnG (Oct 8, 2016)

Lode_Runner said:


> I'm more of a rock/contemporary composer but I have a lot of influence from romantic/early 20th Century orchestral music (along with reggae/dub, ambient electronic music, medieval/renaissance music, West African music, Turkish/Arabian/Iranian music, Japanese music...)



sounds awesome.

Honestly, with that kind of material you probably could escape with either no SSDs at all, or maybe just one for Hollywood Strings if you're finding it glitches too much.

I wonder why your computer store guys said that about your motherboard? Why don't you start a thread about that and list its specs -- see if anyone here is using the full 32? Or even at Gearslutz.

Personally, I never heard of RAM on a PCIe card. At one point, a couple of years ago, there was a PCIe card for Macintosh that had SATA ports and was only about USD$50. They don't have to be expensive.

Good luck!

John


----------



## Lode_Runner (Oct 8, 2016)

JohnG said:


> sounds awesome.
> 
> Honestly, with that kind of material you probably could escape with either no SSDs at all, or maybe just one for Hollywood Strings if you're finding it glitches too much.
> 
> ...



I'm sure it will sound awesome if I can ever reconcile my diverse influences into something coherent and actually finish a track. Eclecticism and perfectionism are a bad mix. 

I'm not sure why they said that, I just took their word for it. I'll do some research.


----------



## JohnG (Oct 8, 2016)

I think your influences sound great and I hope you will not worry too much about coherence. I guess you need some? But I hope you will keep it all going and see what happens.

As far as research on the motherboard, I usually start here, at v.i. (or go straight to the manufacturer's website). People here know a ton.


----------



## kitekrazy (Oct 8, 2016)

JohnG said:


> sounds awesome.
> 
> Honestly, with that kind of material you probably could escape with either no SSDs at all, or maybe just one for Hollywood Strings if you're finding it glitches too much.
> 
> ...



They are often more ignorant than you think, more so when it comes to DAWs.


I often wonder how many have taken inventory of libraries they don't use and don't waste SSD space or end up adding more PCIe SATA ports? The deals on 500GB SSD outweigh the 1TB drives.


----------



## Lode_Runner (Oct 8, 2016)

kitekrazy said:


> They are often more ignorant than you think, more so when it comes to DAWs.
> 
> I often wonder how many have taken inventory of libraries they don't use and don't waste SSD space or end up adding more PCIe SATA ports? The deals on 500GB SSD outweigh the 1TB drives.



I probably could downsize a lot of my libraries that I don't use, but there's something about deleting something I paid good money for that prevents me going down that course. I never see deals on any SSDs in Australia, just '$303' with 'Don't pay $306' written above it as if it's some kind of bargain.


----------

