dual-boot (XP,x64) with RAID 0

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by =?Utf-8?B?YnRr?=, Aug 1, 2005.

  1. Dear All,

    I'm currently running "Windows XP" on a (x64 compatible) Dell computer with
    2 scsi hard drives (same size) in a RAID 0 (striping) setup. I would like to
    setup dual-boot and install "Windows x64" to try it out (I've downloaded the
    x64 drivers from Dell). My system has no partitians and I would prefer to
    stick with my RAID 0 setup (for speed) vs. disabling it and installing
    "Windows x64" on a drive by itself.

    I would appreciate any of your suggestions concerning the best way to go
    about setting this up. Can I create a partition to hold "Windows XP" without
    losing it? Then can I setup the partion for "Windows x64" while I'm
    installing it. Would you create 2 large partitions only? Or would it be
    better to place each o/s in smaller partitions by themselves (siggested
    sizes) and have separate "32bit" and "64bit" (not many!) program file
    partitions?

    Thanks for your help!
    =?Utf-8?B?YnRr?=, Aug 1, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. any of the many partitioning software solutions should allow you to shrink
    your existing raid 0 partition down to make room for another partition.
    http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/ has a solution that has been well reviewed
    here by several folks.

    But first, some due diligence. I realize that striping is somewhat faster
    than non-striping, but you _do_ realize that you not only don't have any
    redundancy, you have actually _increased_ your risk of catastrophic failure
    and data loss?

    So, personally, I would create 4 partitions: 32-bit, 64-bit, programs, and
    data. And I would do some manipulating and management to force 32-bit
    software to install in "Program Files(x86)" even when installing it into
    32-bit windows. Those that won't let you do that, I'd let install into the
    32-bit OS partition.


    --
    Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    ======================
    Charlie.
    http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/


    btk wrote:
    > Dear All,
    >
    > I'm currently running "Windows XP" on a (x64 compatible) Dell
    > computer with 2 scsi hard drives (same size) in a RAID 0 (striping)
    > setup. I would like to setup dual-boot and install "Windows x64" to
    > try it out (I've downloaded the x64 drivers from Dell). My system has
    > no partitians and I would prefer to stick with my RAID 0 setup (for
    > speed) vs. disabling it and installing "Windows x64" on a drive by
    > itself.
    >
    > I would appreciate any of your suggestions concerning the best way to
    > go about setting this up. Can I create a partition to hold "Windows
    > XP" without losing it? Then can I setup the partion for "Windows x64"
    > while I'm installing it. Would you create 2 large partitions only? Or
    > would it be better to place each o/s in smaller partitions by
    > themselves (siggested sizes) and have separate "32bit" and "64bit"
    > (not many!) program file partitions?
    >
    > Thanks for your help!
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Aug 1, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. It really depends on what you plan on doing with OS. Right now, drivers and
    software applications support are the big concern for many. I would
    recommend you set up a partition for both XP x86 and XP Pro x64 of equal
    size. Install XP x86 first then partition from their, then install XP Pro
    x64 on the partition drive you created from with XP x86. Remember that the
    latest version of Windows should be installed last.

    You will then have the option when you boot of the XP Pro x64 CD during text
    based setup to load your F6 Drivers for Harddisk to be supported by XP Pro
    x64.
    --
    Andre
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
    "btk" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Dear All,
    >
    > I'm currently running "Windows XP" on a (x64 compatible) Dell computer
    > with
    > 2 scsi hard drives (same size) in a RAID 0 (striping) setup. I would like
    > to
    > setup dual-boot and install "Windows x64" to try it out (I've downloaded
    > the
    > x64 drivers from Dell). My system has no partitians and I would prefer to
    > stick with my RAID 0 setup (for speed) vs. disabling it and installing
    > "Windows x64" on a drive by itself.
    >
    > I would appreciate any of your suggestions concerning the best way to go
    > about setting this up. Can I create a partition to hold "Windows XP"
    > without
    > losing it? Then can I setup the partion for "Windows x64" while I'm
    > installing it. Would you create 2 large partitions only? Or would it be
    > better to place each o/s in smaller partitions by themselves (siggested
    > sizes) and have separate "32bit" and "64bit" (not many!) program file
    > partitions?
    >
    > Thanks for your help!
    Andre Da Costa, Aug 1, 2005
    #3
  4. If I create 4 partitians as suggested... Would the 32-bit and 64-bit
    partitians be Primary1, Primary2 and both referred to as C: drive? Or
    Primary1 on C: and Primary2 on D:. What about the Programs and Data
    partitians. Secondary1 on D: Secondary2 on E: etc.?

    Thanks!

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > any of the many partitioning software solutions should allow you to shrink
    > your existing raid 0 partition down to make room for another partition.
    > http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/ has a solution that has been well reviewed
    > here by several folks.
    >
    > But first, some due diligence. I realize that striping is somewhat faster
    > than non-striping, but you _do_ realize that you not only don't have any
    > redundancy, you have actually _increased_ your risk of catastrophic failure
    > and data loss?
    >
    > So, personally, I would create 4 partitions: 32-bit, 64-bit, programs, and
    > data. And I would do some manipulating and management to force 32-bit
    > software to install in "Program Files(x86)" even when installing it into
    > 32-bit windows. Those that won't let you do that, I'd let install into the
    > 32-bit OS partition.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    > ======================
    > Charlie.
    > http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/
    >
    >
    > btk wrote:
    > > Dear All,
    > >
    > > I'm currently running "Windows XP" on a (x64 compatible) Dell
    > > computer with 2 scsi hard drives (same size) in a RAID 0 (striping)
    > > setup. I would like to setup dual-boot and install "Windows x64" to
    > > try it out (I've downloaded the x64 drivers from Dell). My system has
    > > no partitians and I would prefer to stick with my RAID 0 setup (for
    > > speed) vs. disabling it and installing "Windows x64" on a drive by
    > > itself.
    > >
    > > I would appreciate any of your suggestions concerning the best way to
    > > go about setting this up. Can I create a partition to hold "Windows
    > > XP" without losing it? Then can I setup the partion for "Windows x64"
    > > while I'm installing it. Would you create 2 large partitions only? Or
    > > would it be better to place each o/s in smaller partitions by
    > > themselves (siggested sizes) and have separate "32bit" and "64bit"
    > > (not many!) program file partitions?
    > >
    > > Thanks for your help!

    >
    >
    >
    =?Utf-8?B?YnRr?=, Aug 1, 2005
    #4
  5. Your drive letters should be the same from both operating systems. You must
    install 32-bit Windows first, so it would generally go on C:, which is
    generally the primary partition 1. After that, you can install as you want.
    My personal preference is to do all partitioning from the Windows text mode
    installation, creating the 4 partitions there.Install 32-bit windows to C:,
    create and format your other 3 partitions/volumes as D:, E: and F:, all
    formatted as NTFS. (I generally kick the CD-ROM or DVD-ROM drive up to R:
    drive, out of the way of everything else as one of my first acts when I get
    the OS installed, and then do a quick regedit to re-point the source
    directories to there.)

    Once you have 32-bit installed, then install the x64 Edition, choosing the
    next partition/volume.

    Note that I've done all my partitioning at the OS level, not at the
    controller level. At the RAID controller level, I would be inclined to simply
    create a single, large partition that the OS will see as a single drive. The
    only reason to do it differently is if you have more than two physical drives
    and want to create some partitions as RAID5, some as RAID1, etc.


    --
    Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    ======================
    Charlie.
    http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/


    btk wrote:
    > If I create 4 partitians as suggested... Would the 32-bit and 64-bit
    > partitians be Primary1, Primary2 and both referred to as C: drive? Or
    > Primary1 on C: and Primary2 on D:. What about the Programs and Data
    > partitians. Secondary1 on D: Secondary2 on E: etc.?
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    >
    >> any of the many partitioning software solutions should allow you to
    >> shrink your existing raid 0 partition down to make room for another
    >> partition. http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/ has a solution that has
    >> been well reviewed here by several folks.
    >>
    >> But first, some due diligence. I realize that striping is somewhat
    >> faster than non-striping, but you _do_ realize that you not only
    >> don't have any redundancy, you have actually _increased_ your risk
    >> of catastrophic failure and data loss?
    >>
    >> So, personally, I would create 4 partitions: 32-bit, 64-bit,
    >> programs, and data. And I would do some manipulating and management
    >> to force 32-bit software to install in "Program Files(x86)" even
    >> when installing it into 32-bit windows. Those that won't let you do
    >> that, I'd let install into the 32-bit OS partition.
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >> Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    >> ======================
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/
    >>
    >>
    >> btk wrote:
    >>> Dear All,
    >>>
    >>> I'm currently running "Windows XP" on a (x64 compatible) Dell
    >>> computer with 2 scsi hard drives (same size) in a RAID 0 (striping)
    >>> setup. I would like to setup dual-boot and install "Windows x64" to
    >>> try it out (I've downloaded the x64 drivers from Dell). My system
    >>> has no partitians and I would prefer to stick with my RAID 0 setup
    >>> (for speed) vs. disabling it and installing "Windows x64" on a
    >>> drive by itself.
    >>>
    >>> I would appreciate any of your suggestions concerning the best way
    >>> to go about setting this up. Can I create a partition to hold
    >>> "Windows XP" without losing it? Then can I setup the partion for
    >>> "Windows x64" while I'm installing it. Would you create 2 large
    >>> partitions only? Or would it be better to place each o/s in smaller
    >>> partitions by themselves (siggested sizes) and have separate
    >>> "32bit" and "64bit" (not many!) program file partitions?
    >>>
    >>> Thanks for your help!
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Aug 1, 2005
    #5
  6. =?Utf-8?B?YnRr?=

    Randy Guest

    If your create primary partitions for each OS, each will boot as a separate
    drive (e.g., C: for x32, D: for x64) with the Windows boot loader (installed
    transparently with each subsequent OS). If you create one primary partition
    for x32 and a logical drive within an extended partition for x64, each would
    then boot as "C:". After your system (boot) drives, others for data etc.
    will retain their respective lettering (i.e., E: will always be Programs, F:
    will always be Data) so long as the OS isn't allowed assigning drive letters
    to newly-installed removeable drives thereafter.

    "btk" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > If I create 4 partitians as suggested... Would the 32-bit and 64-bit
    > partitians be Primary1, Primary2 and both referred to as C: drive? Or
    > Primary1 on C: and Primary2 on D:. What about the Programs and Data
    > partitians. Secondary1 on D: Secondary2 on E: etc.?
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    >
    > > any of the many partitioning software solutions should allow you to

    shrink
    > > your existing raid 0 partition down to make room for another partition.
    > > http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/ has a solution that has been well

    reviewed
    > > here by several folks.
    > >
    > > But first, some due diligence. I realize that striping is somewhat

    faster
    > > than non-striping, but you _do_ realize that you not only don't have any
    > > redundancy, you have actually _increased_ your risk of catastrophic

    failure
    > > and data loss?
    > >
    > > So, personally, I would create 4 partitions: 32-bit, 64-bit, programs,

    and
    > > data. And I would do some manipulating and management to force 32-bit
    > > software to install in "Program Files(x86)" even when installing it into
    > > 32-bit windows. Those that won't let you do that, I'd let install into

    the
    > > 32-bit OS partition.
    > >
    > >
    > > --
    > > Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    > > ======================
    > > Charlie.
    > > http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/
    > >
    > >
    > > btk wrote:
    > > > Dear All,
    > > >
    > > > I'm currently running "Windows XP" on a (x64 compatible) Dell
    > > > computer with 2 scsi hard drives (same size) in a RAID 0 (striping)
    > > > setup. I would like to setup dual-boot and install "Windows x64" to
    > > > try it out (I've downloaded the x64 drivers from Dell). My system has
    > > > no partitians and I would prefer to stick with my RAID 0 setup (for
    > > > speed) vs. disabling it and installing "Windows x64" on a drive by
    > > > itself.
    > > >
    > > > I would appreciate any of your suggestions concerning the best way to
    > > > go about setting this up. Can I create a partition to hold "Windows
    > > > XP" without losing it? Then can I setup the partion for "Windows x64"
    > > > while I'm installing it. Would you create 2 large partitions only? Or
    > > > would it be better to place each o/s in smaller partitions by
    > > > themselves (siggested sizes) and have separate "32bit" and "64bit"
    > > > (not many!) program file partitions?
    > > >
    > > > Thanks for your help!

    > >
    > >
    > >
    Randy, Aug 4, 2005
    #6
  7. no, you'll just end up with your OS's on different drive letters, either way.

    --
    Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    ======================
    Charlie.
    http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/


    Randy wrote:
    > If your create primary partitions for each OS, each will boot as a
    > separate drive (e.g., C: for x32, D: for x64) with the Windows boot
    > loader (installed transparently with each subsequent OS). If you
    > create one primary partition for x32 and a logical drive within an
    > extended partition for x64, each would then boot as "C:". After your
    > system (boot) drives, others for data etc. will retain their
    > respective lettering (i.e., E: will always be Programs, F: will
    > always be Data) so long as the OS isn't allowed assigning drive
    > letters to newly-installed removeable drives thereafter.
    >
    > "btk" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> If I create 4 partitians as suggested... Would the 32-bit and 64-bit
    >> partitians be Primary1, Primary2 and both referred to as C: drive? Or
    >> Primary1 on C: and Primary2 on D:. What about the Programs and Data
    >> partitians. Secondary1 on D: Secondary2 on E: etc.?
    >>
    >> Thanks!
    >>
    >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    >>
    >>> any of the many partitioning software solutions should allow you to
    >>> shrink your existing raid 0 partition down to make room for another
    >>> partition. http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/ has a solution that
    >>> has been well reviewed here by several folks.
    >>>
    >>> But first, some due diligence. I realize that striping is somewhat
    >>> faster than non-striping, but you _do_ realize that you not only
    >>> don't have any redundancy, you have actually _increased_ your risk
    >>> of catastrophic failure and data loss?
    >>>
    >>> So, personally, I would create 4 partitions: 32-bit, 64-bit,
    >>> programs, and data. And I would do some manipulating and management
    >>> to force 32-bit software to install in "Program Files(x86)" even
    >>> when installing it into 32-bit windows. Those that won't let you do
    >>> that, I'd let install into the 32-bit OS partition.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    >>> ======================
    >>> Charlie.
    >>> http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> btk wrote:
    >>>> Dear All,
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm currently running "Windows XP" on a (x64 compatible) Dell
    >>>> computer with 2 scsi hard drives (same size) in a RAID 0 (striping)
    >>>> setup. I would like to setup dual-boot and install "Windows x64" to
    >>>> try it out (I've downloaded the x64 drivers from Dell). My system
    >>>> has no partitians and I would prefer to stick with my RAID 0 setup
    >>>> (for speed) vs. disabling it and installing "Windows x64" on a
    >>>> drive by itself.
    >>>>
    >>>> I would appreciate any of your suggestions concerning the best way
    >>>> to go about setting this up. Can I create a partition to hold
    >>>> "Windows XP" without losing it? Then can I setup the partion for
    >>>> "Windows x64" while I'm installing it. Would you create 2 large
    >>>> partitions only? Or would it be better to place each o/s in
    >>>> smaller partitions by themselves (siggested sizes) and have
    >>>> separate "32bit" and "64bit" (not many!) program file partitions?
    >>>>
    >>>> Thanks for your help!
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Aug 4, 2005
    #7
  8. =?Utf-8?B?YnRr?=

    Randy Guest

    Charlie, have you actually done this?

    With every previous version of Windows from 3.x (+ WFW) through NT 4 WS,
    along with OS/2 2.11 and DOS 3-7, it's always worked out this way for me
    (using logical drive for second OS on an extended partition makes *each*
    boot as drive C:). With ME, 2k, and XP, I kinda lost my need/desire to
    multi-boot. I just keep an entire system (well, notebook/laptop) for
    each...

    I've only tried multi-booting to multiple *primary* partitions (3 per
    physical drive with one extended partition) recently, using Win XP Pro x32
    and x64 with Win Server 2003 x32 and x64; going that route, each subsequent
    OS boots to the incrementally next drive letter... this is with a SATA drive
    on my Dell SC1420.

    I've got its 80G drive partitioned as 4 bootable partitions (3 primary; 1
    logical in the extended partition), 4 application partitions -- one each per
    OS (this may get condensed into 2 if I find I can keep either all x32 and
    x64 apps on two respective logical drives, or all XP Pro and all Server 2003
    apps on two respective logical drives). If you already know the answer, feel
    free to clue me in to spare me the work of re-inventing the wheel. ;~) I
    also have a final logical drive in the extended partition setup for nothing
    but data. All are formated NTFS.

    Defragmenting is a breeze this way using Disk Keeper (they're mailing me a
    beta of the 64bit version; already got a trial for Server and have version 8
    to do XP Pro x32). Phenomenally faster and better than using the built-in
    version. Bleh. And I'm hoping to similarly simplify backups with this
    scheme. This drive will ultimately be mirrored to a second 80G drive for
    fault tolerance, but I doubt I'll do the striping or parity, since speeds
    (SATA150) seem fast enough even for video editing at this point (OK, I've
    only played with Movie Maker so far in x32 Pro). We'll see. For now, I plan
    to simply mirror my 80G SATA drive to an external 80G PATA drive once a week
    or so ala backup instead of making a true fault-tolerant set. I'm slightly
    paranoid about having a true mirror drive up and running the entire time the
    primary drive is; MTBF hours are gonna rack up the same for both if you do,
    so if one dies, the mirror is also likely to... I can do backup ghosts to
    USB2.0 or firewire or either via my USR8200 router over my LAN... or I might
    setup a gigabit fileserver/backup just to make use of the faster transfer
    speeds my 80G server is capable of.

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > no, you'll just end up with your OS's on different drive letters, either

    way.
    >
    > --
    > Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    > ======================
    > Charlie.
    > http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/
    >
    >
    > Randy wrote:
    > > If your create primary partitions for each OS, each will boot as a
    > > separate drive (e.g., C: for x32, D: for x64) with the Windows boot
    > > loader (installed transparently with each subsequent OS). If you
    > > create one primary partition for x32 and a logical drive within an
    > > extended partition for x64, each would then boot as "C:". After your
    > > system (boot) drives, others for data etc. will retain their
    > > respective lettering (i.e., E: will always be Programs, F: will
    > > always be Data) so long as the OS isn't allowed assigning drive
    > > letters to newly-installed removeable drives thereafter.
    > >
    > > "btk" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > >> If I create 4 partitians as suggested... Would the 32-bit and 64-bit
    > >> partitians be Primary1, Primary2 and both referred to as C: drive? Or
    > >> Primary1 on C: and Primary2 on D:. What about the Programs and Data
    > >> partitians. Secondary1 on D: Secondary2 on E: etc.?
    > >>
    > >> Thanks!
    > >>
    > >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> any of the many partitioning software solutions should allow you to
    > >>> shrink your existing raid 0 partition down to make room for another
    > >>> partition. http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/ has a solution that
    > >>> has been well reviewed here by several folks.
    > >>>
    > >>> But first, some due diligence. I realize that striping is somewhat
    > >>> faster than non-striping, but you _do_ realize that you not only
    > >>> don't have any redundancy, you have actually _increased_ your risk
    > >>> of catastrophic failure and data loss?
    > >>>
    > >>> So, personally, I would create 4 partitions: 32-bit, 64-bit,
    > >>> programs, and data. And I would do some manipulating and management
    > >>> to force 32-bit software to install in "Program Files(x86)" even
    > >>> when installing it into 32-bit windows. Those that won't let you do
    > >>> that, I'd let install into the 32-bit OS partition.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>> --
    > >>> Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    > >>> ======================
    > >>> Charlie.
    > >>> http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>> btk wrote:
    > >>>> Dear All,
    > >>>>
    > >>>> I'm currently running "Windows XP" on a (x64 compatible) Dell
    > >>>> computer with 2 scsi hard drives (same size) in a RAID 0 (striping)
    > >>>> setup. I would like to setup dual-boot and install "Windows x64" to
    > >>>> try it out (I've downloaded the x64 drivers from Dell). My system
    > >>>> has no partitians and I would prefer to stick with my RAID 0 setup
    > >>>> (for speed) vs. disabling it and installing "Windows x64" on a
    > >>>> drive by itself.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> I would appreciate any of your suggestions concerning the best way
    > >>>> to go about setting this up. Can I create a partition to hold
    > >>>> "Windows XP" without losing it? Then can I setup the partion for
    > >>>> "Windows x64" while I'm installing it. Would you create 2 large
    > >>>> partitions only? Or would it be better to place each o/s in
    > >>>> smaller partitions by themselves (siggested sizes) and have
    > >>>> separate "32bit" and "64bit" (not many!) program file partitions?
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Thanks for your help!

    >
    >
    Randy, Aug 7, 2005
    #8
  9. Yes, I have done it. My original A8V is:
    SATA1 - 160Gb
    C: -- 20gb, Primary, XP32
    D: -- 20gb, Extended, first drive letter, XPx64
    E: -- 20gb, Extended, second drive letter, Server 2k3x64
    F: -- 20gb, Extended, third drive letter, Will be LH when I have a moment
    G: -- 70+gb, Extended, 4th drive letter, data and programs
    SATA2 - 120Gb, single primary, data

    --
    Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    ======================
    Charlie.
    http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/


    Randy wrote:
    > Charlie, have you actually done this?
    >
    > With every previous version of Windows from 3.x (+ WFW) through NT 4
    > WS, along with OS/2 2.11 and DOS 3-7, it's always worked out this way
    > for me (using logical drive for second OS on an extended partition
    > makes *each* boot as drive C:). With ME, 2k, and XP, I kinda lost my
    > need/desire to multi-boot. I just keep an entire system (well,
    > notebook/laptop) for each...
    >
    > I've only tried multi-booting to multiple *primary* partitions (3 per
    > physical drive with one extended partition) recently, using Win XP
    > Pro x32 and x64 with Win Server 2003 x32 and x64; going that route,
    > each subsequent OS boots to the incrementally next drive letter...
    > this is with a SATA drive on my Dell SC1420.
    >
    > I've got its 80G drive partitioned as 4 bootable partitions (3
    > primary; 1 logical in the extended partition), 4 application
    > partitions -- one each per OS (this may get condensed into 2 if I
    > find I can keep either all x32 and x64 apps on two respective logical
    > drives, or all XP Pro and all Server 2003 apps on two respective
    > logical drives). If you already know the answer, feel free to clue me
    > in to spare me the work of re-inventing the wheel. ;~) I also have a
    > final logical drive in the extended partition setup for nothing but
    > data. All are formated NTFS.
    >
    > Defragmenting is a breeze this way using Disk Keeper (they're mailing
    > me a beta of the 64bit version; already got a trial for Server and
    > have version 8 to do XP Pro x32). Phenomenally faster and better than
    > using the built-in version. Bleh. And I'm hoping to similarly
    > simplify backups with this scheme. This drive will ultimately be
    > mirrored to a second 80G drive for fault tolerance, but I doubt I'll
    > do the striping or parity, since speeds (SATA150) seem fast enough
    > even for video editing at this point (OK, I've only played with Movie
    > Maker so far in x32 Pro). We'll see. For now, I plan to simply mirror
    > my 80G SATA drive to an external 80G PATA drive once a week or so ala
    > backup instead of making a true fault-tolerant set. I'm slightly
    > paranoid about having a true mirror drive up and running the entire
    > time the primary drive is; MTBF hours are gonna rack up the same for
    > both if you do, so if one dies, the mirror is also likely to... I can
    > do backup ghosts to USB2.0 or firewire or either via my USR8200
    > router over my LAN... or I might setup a gigabit fileserver/backup
    > just to make use of the faster transfer speeds my 80G server is
    > capable of.
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    > message news:...
    >> no, you'll just end up with your OS's on different drive letters,
    >> either way.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    >> ======================
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/
    >>
    >>
    >> Randy wrote:
    >>> If your create primary partitions for each OS, each will boot as a
    >>> separate drive (e.g., C: for x32, D: for x64) with the Windows boot
    >>> loader (installed transparently with each subsequent OS). If you
    >>> create one primary partition for x32 and a logical drive within an
    >>> extended partition for x64, each would then boot as "C:". After your
    >>> system (boot) drives, others for data etc. will retain their
    >>> respective lettering (i.e., E: will always be Programs, F: will
    >>> always be Data) so long as the OS isn't allowed assigning drive
    >>> letters to newly-installed removeable drives thereafter.
    >>>
    >>> "btk" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> If I create 4 partitians as suggested... Would the 32-bit and
    >>>> 64-bit partitians be Primary1, Primary2 and both referred to as C:
    >>>> drive? Or Primary1 on C: and Primary2 on D:. What about the
    >>>> Programs and Data partitians. Secondary1 on D: Secondary2 on E:
    >>>> etc.?
    >>>>
    >>>> Thanks!
    >>>>
    >>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> any of the many partitioning software solutions should allow you
    >>>>> to shrink your existing raid 0 partition down to make room for
    >>>>> another partition. http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/ has a
    >>>>> solution that has been well reviewed here by several folks.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> But first, some due diligence. I realize that striping is somewhat
    >>>>> faster than non-striping, but you _do_ realize that you not only
    >>>>> don't have any redundancy, you have actually _increased_ your risk
    >>>>> of catastrophic failure and data loss?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> So, personally, I would create 4 partitions: 32-bit, 64-bit,
    >>>>> programs, and data. And I would do some manipulating and
    >>>>> management to force 32-bit software to install in "Program
    >>>>> Files(x86)" even when installing it into 32-bit windows. Those
    >>>>> that won't let you do that, I'd let install into the 32-bit OS
    >>>>> partition.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> --
    >>>>> Please, all replies to the newsgroup.
    >>>>> ======================
    >>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>> http://www.msmvps.com/xperts64/
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> btk wrote:
    >>>>>> Dear All,
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I'm currently running "Windows XP" on a (x64 compatible) Dell
    >>>>>> computer with 2 scsi hard drives (same size) in a RAID 0
    >>>>>> (striping) setup. I would like to setup dual-boot and install
    >>>>>> "Windows x64" to try it out (I've downloaded the x64 drivers
    >>>>>> from Dell). My system has no partitians and I would prefer to
    >>>>>> stick with my RAID 0 setup (for speed) vs. disabling it and
    >>>>>> installing "Windows x64" on a drive by itself.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I would appreciate any of your suggestions concerning the best
    >>>>>> way to go about setting this up. Can I create a partition to hold
    >>>>>> "Windows XP" without losing it? Then can I setup the partion for
    >>>>>> "Windows x64" while I'm installing it. Would you create 2 large
    >>>>>> partitions only? Or would it be better to place each o/s in
    >>>>>> smaller partitions by themselves (siggested sizes) and have
    >>>>>> separate "32bit" and "64bit" (not many!) program file partitions?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Thanks for your help!
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Aug 9, 2005
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. mhicaoidh

    RAID + Dual Boot = Slow or No Boot

    mhicaoidh, Aug 28, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,305
    mhicaoidh
    Aug 28, 2003
  2. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    742
  3. =?Utf-8?B?VGhlb3JldGljYWxseQ==?=

    Does x64 require a SATA RAID Driver to install non-RAID SATA Drive

    =?Utf-8?B?VGhlb3JldGljYWxseQ==?=, Jul 15, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    830
    Charlie Russel - MVP
    Jul 18, 2005
  4. Hugh Sutherland

    dual boot or not to dual boot

    Hugh Sutherland, Jan 20, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    467
    Mike Easter
    Jan 20, 2010
  5. Hugh Sutherland

    to dual boot or not to dual boot

    Hugh Sutherland, Jan 20, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    416
    thanatoid
    Jan 21, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page