Future Windows 10 Builds Will Reserve Storage and Tabulate It

spine said:
Windows 7 never went away ;)

and Linux is actually worse in this regard.
Click to expand...

Well 7 will be going away. MS is going to stop updating it shortly... and running any version of windows that hasn't had security updates for any time frame is a bad idea.

Curious how you feel Linux is worse in this regard though? You can run anything from 1 to infinity parts under Linux up to the user. As for updates Linux uses a proper inode setup and simply downloads the updates and changes the inode addresses instantly recovering the space from the previous files locations. Its why updates take seconds to install instead of hours. So as long as you have the space to download an update in Linux you are golden. I guess if you did really have massive amounts of updates to do you may have to do them one package at a time... but ya even a rolling release rarely has more then a 1gb of updates to do.
 
Linux is great. Ran out of /var space and resized it by truncating the root partition and growing /var. Problem solved via LVM.
 
spine said:
Windows 7 never went away ;)

and Linux is actually worse in this regard.
Click to expand...

I've been using Linux since the 90's. Never once has any linux distribution messed with my partitions without me asking it to.

Sure, Linux distributions tend to (but don't have to) use a separate partition for swap space, but you don't have to set them up that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: naib
like this
focbde said:
So you don't want correctly block-aligned partitions then? Well OK, your call, but personally I prefer my storage to be as fast as possible. Sure, the partition is bigger than it needs to be, but it does have a purpose as well other than alignment.
Click to expand...

Those 16MB unidentifiable mini-partitions likely have nothing at all to do with block aligning.

The block size on older hard drives and SSD's tends to be 512 bytes. Newer hard drives tend to have 4k block sizes. 16MB makes no sense here.

That, and you can align partitions by just leaving empty space. You don't need to fill them with an unidentifiable mini-partition that breaks shit.
 
Mega6 said:
Yeah dx12 it is and I dont even use that. Use the windows7 backup and take system images of everything. I don't bother with the libraries to save space and mount the vhdx and have LOTS of drives to keep my data safe and separate. C: boot has ONLY OS and if it goes, which it will eventually.. to recover quickly.

*divide and conquer*
Click to expand...

Lol I looked into the system image option but it wants to image not only my C drive but F drive as well (I think because my Steam and Origin are installed on that drive) which makes for an image file greater than 1.3 TB. Gotta love Windows....
 
I've had some corruption in Linux due to app issues, fsck and fixed.
psy81 said:
Lol I looked into the system image option but it wants to image not only my C drive but F drive as well (I think because my Steam and Origin are installed on that drive) which makes for an image file greater than 1.3 TB. Gotta love Windows....
Click to expand...
Select "let me choose"
 
SGTGimpy said:
I am guessing you used a installation disk provided by your Laptops manufacture. Those are not fresh install media and have customizations built into the OS from the OEM. This is my guess as to why you have that 4th 900MB partition. As with a true fresh install of Windows (using the media creation tool to create a USB install media), you will only have three partitions.
Click to expand...

Possible, but unlikely. My employer has a Microsoft agreement where we have access to nearly all Microsoft product ISOs which activate via an on-site KMS server. This was just an 1803 ISO that I pulled off the shared storage server. Probably the only thing more "vanilla" would be an ISO from technet but I no longer have access to those.
 
Mega6 said:
I've had some corruption in Linux due to app issues, fsck and fixed.

Select "let me choose"
Click to expand...

That option does not exist under "create system image" for backup and restore in both W7 and W10... any good third party options?
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Those 16MB unidentifiable mini-partitions likely have nothing at all to do with block aligning.

The block size on older hard drives and SSD's tends to be 512 bytes. Newer hard drives tend to have 4k block sizes. 16MB makes no sense here.

That, and you can align partitions by just leaving empty space. You don't need to fill them with an unidentifiable mini-partition that breaks shit.
Click to expand...

The first 'available' blocks to Windows are not at the beginning of the drive of course, so there can be alignment issues. Win2K for example had big problems with this. Starting with XP/Server 2003 MS started automatically doing block alignment, but as there was a minimum partition size, the partitions were bigger than required. Cut to today, and they do the same thing, but also make the partition bigger to 'reserve' it for something else. Not saying it's not unnecessary to have it that big, just saying it possibly IS necessary for alignment.

SSDs are different again, because you're dealing with page sizes, not blocks.

To be fair, block alignment is much more of an issue in the server space with misalignment being a common performance degradation cause.
 
focbde said:
The first 'available' blocks to Windows are not at the beginning of the drive of course, so there can be alignment issues. Win2K for example had big problems with this. Starting with XP/Server 2003 MS started automatically doing block alignment, but as there was a minimum partition size, the partitions were bigger than required. Cut to today, and they do the same thing, but also make the partition bigger to 'reserve' it for something else. Not saying it's not unnecessary to have it that big, just saying it possibly IS necessary for alignment.

SSDs are different again, because you're dealing with page sizes, not blocks.

To be fair, block alignment is much more of an issue in the server space with misalignment being a common performance degradation cause.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing that lick alignment can't be a problem. I am familiar with it.

I arguing that celebrating an unmanageable mininparition (if that is what it is for) is possibly the worst way to deal with the issue.

Just do what everything else does. Just create the partition a tiny bit later and leave a tiny gap of empty space...
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I'm not arguing that lick alignment can't be a problem. I am familiar with it.

I arguing that celebrating an unmanageable mininparition (if that is what it is for) is possibly the worst way to deal with the issue.

Just do what everything else does. Just create the partition a tiny bit later and leave a tiny gap of empty space...
Click to expand...

You realise that empty space at the beginning in disk manager for example would show up as well, right? So whether it's a partition or not, it's still visible there because the disk from left to right is shown in order as beginning to end, and then the only factor is the size, and 100MB or so these days isn't exactly upsetting - well, not to me anyway. Don't get me wrong, I do see what you mean, but I just don't see the big issue.
 
focbde said:
You realise that empty space at the beginning in disk manager for example would show up as well, right? So whether it's a partition or not, it's still visible there because the disk from left to right is shown in order as beginning to end, and then the only factor is the size, and 100MB or so these days isn't exactly upsetting - well, not to me anyway. Don't get me wrong, I do see what you mean, but I just don't see the big issue.
Click to expand...


Visible, yes, but I could still manage it with parted based tools. The tiny 16mb partitions show up as "unknown" and parted won't touch them, so I can't do anything.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I've been using Linux since the 90's. Never once has any linux distribution messed with my partitions without me asking it to.

Sure, Linux distributions tend to (but don't have to) use a separate partition for swap space, but you don't have to set them up that way.
Click to expand...

Having said that, the partitioning scheme under Linux is neat and reserving a partition for swap makes sense. My whole OS install takes up 24.8GB.
 
And the next version will reserve your time, and tabulate it. And 10 years later it will reserve your internal organs and tabulate them.
 
ChadD said:
and running any version of windows that hasn't had security updates for any time frame is a bad idea..
Click to expand...
Everyone just saying parroting that, but does anyone actually know the risks? I mean is it really a big problem, when it is sitting behind a firewall, and there is some sort of active virus protection running on it?
 
M76 said:
Everyone just saying parroting that, but does anyone actually know the risks? I mean is it really a big problem, when it is sitting behind a firewall, and there is some sort of active virus protection running on it?
Click to expand...
I've seen systems get infected with cryptoviruses or mining viruses by just being connected to the internet behind a firewall, even systems that don't her user interaction like test VMs or db severs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top