Where should second HDD be located?

[vkr15]

Wanted to hook up a second hard drive primarily for backups and locating the page file in an exclusive partition for faster access. Its an IDE drive: presently on Channel IDE 0 I have a HDD as master and on Channel IDE 1 the CD/DVD drive also as master. I've been advised NOT  to hook up the second HDD as slave on IDE 0 as it would slow down my machine and the very purpose of locating the page file for achieving faster access would be defeated since the OS on the master and slave in IDE 0 would both be constantly accessed thus slowing down both drives. Would it be advisable therefore that I hook up the second physical HDD as master or slave on IDE 1 to improve performance?
Grateful for your views/recommendations.
vkr15

[dl65]

vkr15...... If I was doing that , I would be putting both the Hard drives on the primary IDE. Others may have differing opinions.

Paging File Performance - The paging file issue has been beaten to death time and time again, but it's still a fact that placing the paging file [highlight]in a separate partition - on a different hard drive from [/highlight][highlight]the system drive [/highlight]- will aid performance in the majority of cases. If nothing else, it will help eliminate fragmentation of the primary drive that can seriously impact performance as the paging file is expanded and contracted.
What kind of a system do you have?

dl65  

[vkr15]

Couldn't agree with you more dl65.
The logic being put forward by proponents of locating page file on a different channel to the one where the OS is located is because of constant access to both the system files on the OS and the page file when running your programs or apps thus slowing it down. So, though it will help prevent fragmentation of the page file(if both hard drives are on the primary IDE) it would impact on the performance because of constant head movement on the hard drives. To obviate this,so the proponents say, it would be better to locate the second hard drive on a different channel. This is really applicable to IDE drives(not SCSI or SATA drives). Since this issue (of locating the paging file to a second hard drive on a different channel other than the OS) was not mentioned on any of the web pages that I researched, I thought I would seek a second opinion.

My system is pretty basic and would like to keep it that way:-
XP Home with SP 2.
RAM 768 MB
Intel processor 2.6 ghz, on board graphics.
IDE 0 & IDE 1 drives.( IDE ATA/ATAPI controllers)
Thankful for your views.
vkr15

[mtnbkr01201]

I too have tried to connect two HD's, and the computer will not recognize the second drive, I had replaced the 40 GIG with a 200, and was told a while back by a friend that I could use the 40 to run the main apps, how do I get my Dell to recognize both without any conflics, both are still in the computer, but only the 200 gig is hooked up.

Thank you for your time
William

BTW, mine is a Dell dimentions 2400, nothing big, just an average computer

[patio]

I too have tried to connect two HD's, and the computer will not recognize the second drive, I had replaced the 40 GIG with a 200, and was told a while back by a friend that I could use the 40 to run the main apps, how do I get my Dell to recognize both without any conflics, both are still in the computer, but only the 200 gig is hooked up.

Thank you for your time
William

BTW, mine is a Dell dimentions 2400, nothing big, just an average computer

Welcome Aboard.

It's best to start a new thread so it recieves the proper attention....it could be as simple as a jumper setting. We have a resident Dell expert ....he'll be along shortly.

patio.  8-)

[soybean]

Wanted to hook up a second hard drive primarily for backups and locating the page file in an exclusive partition for faster access. Its an IDE drive: presently on Channel IDE 0 I have a HDD as master and on Channel IDE 1 the CD/DVD drive also as master. [highlight]I've been advised NOT  to hook up the second HDD as slave on IDE 0 as it would slow down my machine and the very purpose of locating the page file for achieving faster access would be defeated since the OS on the master and slave in IDE 0 would both be constantly accessed thus slowing down both drives. [/highlight]Would it be advisable therefore that I hook up the second physical HDD as master or slave on IDE 1 to improve performance?
Grateful for your views/recommendations.
vkr15

Do you have any good references to support that theory?  I'm not sure it's true.  But, if it is, my guess is you should set the second drive as master on IDE 1 if you connect it to IDE 1, and set the CD-ROM as slave.

Have you looked at the report Windows Disk Defragmenter generates when you run it to see what it shows for pagefile fragmentation?  I have never done anything special to defragment the paging file on my Win XP Pro SP2 OS partition, but Disk Defragmenter only reports 1 fragment, indicating no fragmentation.  I have my paging file set for a minimum size of 768MB and a maximum size of 1536.  

[patio]

I'd like to see someone who can actually notice a speed difference by setting up a pagefile this way.

I set it up 3 or 4 times this way and others following the thousands of website offerings and advice given a few years back.

I'll take the time spent, pay myself at my going rate and add a new stick of RAM anyday...

Just my thoughts.

[vkr15]

Thanks to dl65,soybean,patio for your views/thoughts/recommendations.
vkr15.