From: zigipha on
As part of my work on copying files from a laptop, i tangentially came
across the topic of dynamic vs basic disks.

I am looking for some validation/verification of the following:

From my reading, it seems that basic disks are more "portable" (i.e.
recognized by more OSs and usable in more situations) but any changes
to partitions need to be done outside of the OS; while dynamic disks
have more flexibility (change partitoin size in the OS, etc) but are
limited to xp professional, vista business(nothing with a "home" in
the name of the os).

I am not sure how I wound up with a dynamic disk (maybe its the
default windows uses when installing a new disk), but it seems to me
that for the average home use, basic disks is the way to go
1. Move a disk from computer 1 to computer 2: basic is more flexible
(dynamic will limit the destination computer)
2. Move a disk from internal to external enclosure: can only be done
with basic disks
Thoughts?

Thanks in advance!
From: Mike Ruskai on
On or about Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:44:26 -0700 (PDT) did zigipha(a)hotmail.com
dribble thusly:

>As part of my work on copying files from a laptop, i tangentially came
>across the topic of dynamic vs basic disks.
>
>I am looking for some validation/verification of the following:
>
>From my reading, it seems that basic disks are more "portable" (i.e.
>recognized by more OSs and usable in more situations) but any changes
>to partitions need to be done outside of the OS; while dynamic disks
>have more flexibility (change partitoin size in the OS, etc) but are
>limited to xp professional, vista business(nothing with a "home" in
>the name of the os).
>
>I am not sure how I wound up with a dynamic disk (maybe its the
>default windows uses when installing a new disk), but it seems to me
>that for the average home use, basic disks is the way to go
>1. Move a disk from computer 1 to computer 2: basic is more flexible
>(dynamic will limit the destination computer)
>2. Move a disk from internal to external enclosure: can only be done
>with basic disks
> Thoughts?

You have to explicitly set a disc as dynamic.

The only reason to do so is to use software RAID options. It does wreck a
whole lot of compatibility, including with some of Microsoft's own tools
(trying to restore a complex dynamic disk setup from backup is a major
headache).
From: Tony on

<zigipha(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:03b1d036-2ae0-4609-a2cf-4c8bd9c3e548(a)s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> As part of my work on copying files from a laptop, i tangentially came
> across the topic of dynamic vs basic disks.
>
> I am looking for some validation/verification of the following:
>
> From my reading, it seems that basic disks are more "portable" (i.e.
> recognized by more OSs and usable in more situations) but any changes
> to partitions need to be done outside of the OS; while dynamic disks
> have more flexibility (change partitoin size in the OS, etc) but are
> limited to xp professional, vista business(nothing with a "home" in
> the name of the os).
>
> I am not sure how I wound up with a dynamic disk (maybe its the
> default windows uses when installing a new disk), but it seems to me
> that for the average home use, basic disks is the way to go
> 1. Move a disk from computer 1 to computer 2: basic is more flexible
> (dynamic will limit the destination computer)
> 2. Move a disk from internal to external enclosure: can only be done
> with basic disks
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks in advance!

When you think "dynamic disks", think "software RAID", mostly. Also think
"more trouble than it's worth, certainly for a standalone "Personal
Computer". If you like to tinker though, have at it! (Have your data safe
elsewhere while you tinker!). When I first setup, recently, my new SATA
desktop drives with a PCI RAID card, I thought "wow, pretty much made my
aging desktop PC snappy again". Then when I started having reliability
problems with the drives I was getting and had to use just a single drive, I
noticed that most of the usable day to day snappiness was still there:
because the new drives perform better (surely because of the platter
density, as they are the same RPM as the old drive and my motherboard
doesn't support NCQ nor SATA II and I don't think a single drive can
saturate a 1.5 Gb/s bus anyway).

Remember that with MS Dynamic Disks, the Windows system partition cannot be
striped (nor mirrored?) so there will be no performance gain from that.
Also, consider how striping drives will complicate your backup and restore
process. If you really want RAID 0 (reliability) or RAID 1 (performance), I
suggest you buy a GOOD RAID card or a new motherboard that supports RAID (I
prefer the latter at this time and am waiting till nice processors come down
to about $100, but it's my job to evaluate this stuff... I prefer
simplicity). Note that you should have a spare drive on hand in case one of
your RAID 0/1 array drives fails (most cards support hot spares). RAID is
not a substitute for backup or imaging.

All in all, most should not waste time with RAID (it's for servers!) and
rather invest that time in obtaining or evolving a robust backup and imaging
solution. SSDs (fast and reliable) are not as far as they appear (here now
if you are rich).

Tony


From: Rod Speed on
zigipha(a)hotmail.com wrote:

> As part of my work on copying files from a laptop, i tangentially
> came across the topic of dynamic vs basic disks.

> I am looking for some validation/verification of the following:

> From my reading, it seems that basic disks are more "portable"
> (i.e. recognized by more OSs and usable in more situations)

Correct.

> but any changes to partitions need to be done outside of the OS;

Not correct.

> while dynamic disks have more flexibility

Correct.

> (change partitoin size in the OS, etc)

And can have more than one physical drive in the dynamic disk and RAID etc.

> but are limited to xp professional, vista business(nothing with a "home" in the name of the os).

Its a bit more complicated than that, but thats the basic idea.

> I am not sure how I wound up with a dynamic disk

Usually someone set it up that way, often unknowningly.

> (maybe its the default windows uses when installing a new disk),

Nope.

> but it seems to me that for the average home use, basic disks is the way to go

Correct.

> 1. Move a disk from computer 1 to computer 2: basic is
> more flexible (dynamic will limit the destination computer)

And recovery is easier, as you discovered.

> 2. Move a disk from internal to external enclosure: can only be done with basic disks

Correct.

> Thoughts?

I avoid those, they just make my head hurt.

> Thanks in advance!

Even if we tell you to go and shove your head up a dead bear's bum ?


From: Stephen on
On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:44:26 -0700 (PDT), zigipha(a)hotmail.com had a
flock of green cheek conures squawk out:

>As part of my work on copying files from a laptop, i tangentially came
>across the topic of dynamic vs basic disks.
>
>I am looking for some validation/verification of the following:
>
>From my reading, it seems that basic disks are more "portable" (i.e.
>recognized by more OSs and usable in more situations) but any changes
>to partitions need to be done outside of the OS; while dynamic disks
>have more flexibility (change partitoin size in the OS, etc) but are
>limited to xp professional, vista business(nothing with a "home" in
>the name of the os).
>
>I am not sure how I wound up with a dynamic disk (maybe its the
>default windows uses when installing a new disk), but it seems to me
>that for the average home use, basic disks is the way to go
>1. Move a disk from computer 1 to computer 2: basic is more flexible
>(dynamic will limit the destination computer)
>2. Move a disk from internal to external enclosure: can only be done
>with basic disks
> Thoughts?
>
>Thanks in advance!

For dynamic disks, windows stores the info needed to access them on
another drive. I found that out when I re-formatted one and lost
access to the other one.

Stephen

--
Stephen

Have a Problem, Blame it on El Ni´┐Żo