Use two hdd's?

All other things being equal, is it a big improvement, in system performance, to have two hard drives (non-raid) with your OS and paging files on one and other programs and files on another? Or should I just replace my drive that's almost full and just use one larger one?

Yes - B IG difference.

On my old XP machine the boot drive had all the programs including CS3, and a second WD internal drive held all my data files. I just had a new Win7 machine built with the boot drive being an SSD, and an internal 2TB WD Caviar Black for my images. With that SSD things now happen in one-two blinks .

Yep. Though if you have enough RAM you shouldn't hit a paging file.

I have the following drive configuration:
- C: OS and programs - 60GB SSD
- D: General data, personal images, 1TB Seagate
- E: Commercial images, 2TB Segate
- F: Cache, swap, and misc small data, 120GB SSD
- M: Media files, 2TB WD Black.

Along with an i7 and 16GB of RAM the machine's pretty quick.

Personally I would never have a system with a single hard disk, if the drive fails or becomes corrupted you can lose everything. I always use one drive for OS and some programs. Other programs and storage go to a second drive.

It can be beneficial to have the paging file on a seperate drive from you operating system, as long as that drive is as fast.

My current setup is an SSD for OS and some programs. A 150 gig WD Velociraptor for other programs and short term storage. I have 24 gigs of RAM so I have the paging file set to 0.

My main storage is a dedicated storage/htpc. Important files and my RAW photos also get backed up to archival grade DVD's which I store at my place of work.

im with the others.

Main drive is as small and as fast and I can afford. Usually a 40-60gb max and SSD. Then a main external for Movies, TV SHows and Music, another for Raw Images only and one for exproted JPEGS. Than another for fun cause I like storage.. Im a storage hog.

-dave-m- wrote in post #14069933
It can be beneficial to have the paging file on a seperate drive from you operating system, as long as that drive is as fast.

My current setup is an SSD for OS and some programs. A 150 gig WD Velociraptor for other programs and short term storage. I have 24 gigs of RAM so I have the paging file set to 0.

Put the paging file on the OS SSD can be a good move, if you have plenty of RAM. You rarely go into swap with programs, it's with data, so given the disk isn't being used to read programs or OS it might as well hold the paging file.

Thanks for all the replies! I agree with the sentiment of having only one and losing everything if it dies. I do have an external drive that backs up my images each day. I put in some more memory yesterday, max of 8 gigs (relatively older system) and was toying with the idea of adding another or replacing the drive since there's only 60 gigs, or so, of remaining space, after removing junk.

I think I'll wait a bit and replace the existing drive with an ssd and a couple larger drives. Thanks, again, for the input. It is appreciated.

Internal hard drives aren't really a backup. If you lose a drive with two drives you either lose your OS or your data. Good backups of both are essential.

So, a family member knew I wanted a larger drive, and got me one. I now have a 160GB and 500GB drive, both 7200rpm. Looking at the posts above, it appears that everything applies to ssd. I can not afford an ssd at this time. With that in mind, I was going to put the OS and programs on the smaller drive and all my data on the second drive.

What constitutes data though? Obviously, documents, photos, music, videos. But what about stuff like configuration files and data for games or other programs? LR catalog file? LR and windows paging file? Basically, what data should be placed on the secondary drive to improve performance?

Thanks for your patience.

MedicinSC wrote in post #14120107
So, a family member knew I wanted a larger drive, and got me one. I now have a 160GB and 500GB drive, both 7200rpm. Looking at the posts above, it appears that everything applies to ssd. I can not afford an ssd at this time. With that in mind, I was going to put the OS and programs on the smaller drive and all my data on the second drive.

What constitutes data though? Obviously, documents, photos, music, videos. But what about stuff like configuration files and data for games or other programs? LR catalog file? LR and windows paging file? Basically, what data should be placed on the secondary drive to improve performance?

Thanks for your patience.

Hi Med - actually what you've written above describes my last machine. A lot of the basic principles still apply.

My old XP machine has a 160GB HD that I used as my boot drive (Drive C). It contains my operating system and programs like PS, Office, Bridge, ACR, etc. Data are things that you create.........like word/excel files, image files (JPGs, RAW files) movie (video files you edit) - things of that nature.

I kept all of my JPG and RAW files on my second (data) 500GB HD. For my own convenience sake, I used a directory naming structure that goes back to DOS days before windows. I would create a main directory called DATA and then build subdirectories under it for the different types of data. It may not be as critical in today's world, but I always knew where my data was if I had to move it, back it up, copy it, or locate it in a hurry.

As for things like configuration files and saved games - well, I just let the program "leave" it in the default install/saving location on the root (C) drive. So I wasn't completely pure in my data strategy. But it has worked pretty well since 1988 . I hope this helps.

It does, thank you.

MedicinSC wrote in post #14120691
It does, thank you.

You are very welcome . The good news is that SSD's continue to come down in price. Good buys seem to be in the 120GB range which is sufficient for programs and a bit left over.

Not all SSDs are created equal though. They've been out since around 2008 thereabouts - the memory cells they're made of work pretty well - but there are different controllers on the market. Some have a higher failure rate, some are configured better, some more reliable..........just have the read the current articles.