F u r u y a wrote on Jan 31^st, 2009 at 1:07pm:

If you are starting from a clean drive, the first partitions you make will be placed on the outside of the drive.  Subsequent partitions will be placed further and further in.  It doesn't matter what type of partition it is.  However, if you are not starting from a clean drive, you can't assume lower 'numbered' or 'lettered' partitions are necessarily on the outside.  Your partitioning tools should be able to give you some sort of indication of where your partition is at on the drive.

Note that most of us here on this forum have decided that there is very little percievable performance differene between inner and outer partitions.  I think that this is likely true because most of your performance is based on seek times, rather than read times.

Also note that you can only have one extended partition.  You cannot have two, as in your diagram.

F u r u y a wrote on Jan 31^st, 2009 at 1:07pm:

1. Yes.  Just make sure the Windows 'system' partition is on a primary partition.   Windows stores some files it uses to boot up on the system partition, and these files must be on a primary partition.  Note that this is just the 'system' partition.  The 'boot' partition contains the actual OS and can be on an extended partition.  They can also be the same partition if that partition is primary.  

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314470

Sorry that's a little confusing, but I didn't come up with the scheme...

2. I think you are asking if you will be able to read the data on a different partition if there is another OS installed on it.  The answer depends on the filesystem on the drive.  If you have WinXP on it and formatted it with NTFS or FAT, then you will be able to read/write to it.  If it has Linux on it and you formatted it with FAT/FAT32, then you will be able to read/write to it.  If it has Linux and you format it with EXT2/3/4 or RiserFS or many of the other Linux filesystems, then no, Windows is not able to read those easily.

3. It is not mandatory to have a partition for the swap file.  It is just a file and can go anywhere.  It is nice to have it on its own partition so that it is guarenteed not to get fragmented.  That partition can be logical.

I assume you've read Rad's guide, but from some of the questions you asked I'm not sure if that's a good assumption.  It has tons of great information and will probably clear some things up for you:
http://partition.radified.com/

F u r u y a wrote on Jan 31^st, 2009 at 6:17pm:

If you leave the existing partitions on there, then where your new partitions end up will depend on where the current partitions are and how big the new partition is going to be.  I think by default, FDISK tries to put the new partition in the free space that is closest to the outer edge and is big enough to hold the new partition.  Does that make sense?  Many other partition tools behave similarly.  

If there is anyway you can back up the data in the existing partitions to another disk while you repartition this one, that will allow you to remove all the partitions currently there and start from scratch.  While not mandatory, it will give you much more flexibility in where you create the new partitions.

F u r u y a wrote on Jan 31^st, 2009 at 6:17pm:

Its easy to do, you just have to set your partitions up ahead of time.  The WinXP installer tries really hard to automate the process, so you don't have much control over it.  The boot partition is wherever you tell the installer to install WinXP to.  If that is on a logical partition, then the installer will use the first available primary partition with either a FAT/NTFS file system as the system partition.  I don't think it has to be the first partition, but it does have to be primary.  If your boot partition is a primary partition, I don't think it will use a seperate system partition, as its not needed.

If you don't have a either a FAT16/32 or NTFS primary partition available for the installer to use as a system partition, it will complain and refuse to install.

Note that the system partition doesn't have to be dedicated to the 'system' files.  The system files take up very little space (< 100 MB).  You can make the partition very small if you want.  If the partition is bigger than that, you can still use the space to store other files - videos, songs, documents, whatever.  Just make sure you don't destroy that partition later or Windows will not be able to boot.

That's how I remember it.  Maybe someone who has actually studied the details of the WinXP install could clarify for me.

I hope that is understandable.  I feel like it could be explained more clearly but I can't find the right words.

F u r u y a,

With partitioning software (not Microsoft) you can be flexible and put the WinXP partition at the end of the HD if you like. But you wouldn't.

Have a look at the WinXP videos at this site. Especially "Installing Windows XP to its own primary partition". It helps you understand the background of a WinXP installation.

http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/bootit-next-generation-tutorials.htm

Thx for your reply Brian and Rad.

@Brian
I'll partition using FDISK because I'll first remove all partitions prior to creating them. Sry but I can't see the movie (I tried VLC but still the movie didn't work here in my old K6-II with Win98SE).

@Rad
Yes, I just realize that after MrMagoo message and FDISK guide. :]



I know that's a lot of things to answer so I will quote just the principal question:
Quote:


Just another question:

• A WinXP.Pro.SP2 installation CD will recognize my 250GB HDD entirely will all the partitions I created with FDISK? Or it will recognize only 128GB as happens under WinXP environment without SP2?

Yeah Pleo, that's because these days all hard drives are zoned; the difference is there and measurable for all of them, provided that the interface to the drive is fast enough to avoid being a bottleneck, which it generally wasn't pre-SATA.

The fact that SATA has made the presence of zoning visible in synthetic benchmarks to more people doesn't mean it's worth worrying about in practice though. In real use for filesystems it's so far down the list of performance factors it's a total non-issue.

F u r u y a wrote on Feb 1^st, 2009 at 9:57pm:

MrMagoo wrote on Jan 31^st, 2009 at 3:41pm:


F u r u y a wrote on Feb 1^st, 2009 at 9:57pm:

I haven't had this issue with my WinXP installations.  I think it depends on your BIOS, not Windows.  My large drives (200GB+) are always recognized.  Maybe I slipstreamed in some magic a long time ago I've forgotten, so someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote:

Nigel,

I'm a bit confused about zoned HDs. Does this mean it doesn't matter (speed wise) if you have the OS partition at the "end" of the HD as opposed to the "start" of the HD?