Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What are the benefits of using dynamic disks over basic?

Last response: in Storage
Share
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 7, 2005 2:56:15 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Hi

Ive been reading a little about how to create Dynamic Discs but I havent
come across anything to explain why I would want to use it over Basic disks.

Thanks for any info

Ian
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 8, 2005 8:32:51 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Ian Roberts <sorry@NOSPAM.com> wrote

> Ive been reading a little about how to create Dynamic Discs but I havent come
> across anything to explain why I would want to use it over Basic disks.

They basically give you more capability, like being able to
span more than one physical drive into a combined logical drive.

There are however some downsides too, like if one physical
drive dies, all the data in the spanned volume is at risk, not
just the data on the single drive that has died. Obviously thats
just a nuisance if you are fully backed up etc.

Support for dynamic disks is worse with imaging software etc too.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 8, 2005 8:32:52 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3ln2elF136cbfU1@individual.net...
> Ian Roberts <sorry@NOSPAM.com> wrote
>
>> Ive been reading a little about how to create Dynamic Discs but I havent
>> come across anything to explain why I would want to use it over Basic
>> disks.
>
> They basically give you more capability, like being able to
> span more than one physical drive into a combined logical drive.
>
> There are however some downsides too, like if one physical
> drive dies, all the data in the spanned volume is at risk, not
> just the data on the single drive that has died. Obviously thats
> just a nuisance if you are fully backed up etc.
>
> Support for dynamic disks is worse with imaging software etc too.

Thanks for replying Rod

So it sounds similar to RAID to me.

I wonder... does it allow drives of different sizes to be combined and
utilise all the space? Would be great if thats possible. This would allow me
to make use of some old small drives I have lying around ie 4-9Gb each.

If I put them in an external enclosure (connected via firewire or USB) would
a dynamic setup be allowed or is that arrangement considered "removable" and
therefore not poss?

Thanks for your time.

Ian
Related resources
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 8, 2005 10:40:27 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Ian Roberts <sorry@NOSPAM.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Ian Roberts <sorry@NOSPAM.com> wrote

>>> Ive been reading a little about how to create Dynamic Discs but I havent
>>> come across anything to explain why I would want to use it over Basic disks.

>> They basically give you more capability, like being able to
>> span more than one physical drive into a combined logical drive.

>> There are however some downsides too, like if one physical
>> drive dies, all the data in the spanned volume is at risk, not
>> just the data on the single drive that has died. Obviously thats
>> just a nuisance if you are fully backed up etc.

>> Support for dynamic disks is worse with imaging software etc too.

> Thanks for replying Rod

> So it sounds similar to RAID to me.

Similar to RAID0, anyway. Not quite as bad tho because individual
files arent always split between the physical drives, so with no
backups and a single physical drive failure, you're more likely to
be able to recover at least some of the files with dynamic disks.

> I wonder... does it allow drives of different sizes to be combined and utilise
> all the space?

Yes. And different drive performance is completely irrelevant too.

> Would be great if thats possible. This would allow me to make use of some old
> small drives I have lying around ie 4-9Gb each.

Yeah, its most useful for that sort of thing.

> If I put them in an external enclosure (connected via firewire or USB) would a
> dynamic setup be allowed or is that arrangement considered "removable" and
> therefore not poss?

Correct, it wont do that with those, essentially because
its much too easy to have one of them offline.

You could however put the drives in a seperate server and
have whatever you like connecting that to the main system.
Lan would normally be better than USB or firewire tho.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 8, 2005 10:40:28 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3ln9ttF13pqgmU1@individual.net
> Ian Roberts <sorry@NOSPAM.com> wrote
> > Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
> > > Ian Roberts <sorry@NOSPAM.com> wrote
>
> > > > Ive been reading a little about how to create Dynamic Discs but I havent
> > > > come across anything to explain why I would want to use it over Basic disks.
>
> > > They basically give you more capability, like being able to
> > > span more than one physical drive into a combined logical drive.
>
> > > There are however some downsides too, like if one physical
> > > drive dies, all the data in the spanned volume is at risk, not
> > > just the data on the single drive that has died. Obviously thats
> > > just a nuisance if you are fully backed up etc.
>
> > > Support for dynamic disks is worse with imaging software etc too.
>
> > Thanks for replying Rod
>
> > So it sounds similar to RAID to me.
>
> Similar to RAID0, anyway.

Nonsense.

> Not quite as bad tho because individual
> files arent always split between the physical drives, so with no
> backups and a single physical drive failure, you're more likely to
> be able to recover at least some of the files with dynamic disks.

That's just clueless rant.

>
> > I wonder... does it allow drives of different sizes to be combined and utilise
> > all the space?
>
> Yes. And different drive performance is completely irrelevant too.
>
> > Would be great if thats possible. This would allow me to make use of some old
> > small drives I have lying around ie 4-9Gb each.
>
> Yeah, its most useful for that sort of thing.
>
> > If I put them in an external enclosure (connected via firewire or USB) would a
> > dynamic setup be allowed or is that arrangement considered "removable" and
> > therefore not poss?

Depends on whether the driver allows to set them as 'fixed'.

>
> Correct, it wont do that with those, essentially because
> its much too easy to have one of them offline.

Not if they can be set 'fixed'.

>
> You could however put the drives in a seperate server and
> have whatever you like connecting that to the main system.
> Lan would normally be better than USB or firewire tho.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 8, 2005 8:28:33 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Inline (as I understand the term you're asking for)


"Ian Roberts" <sorry@NOSPAM.com> kirjoitti viestissä
news:D d5qas$els$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
>
> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3ln2elF136cbfU1@individual.net...
> > Ian Roberts <sorry@NOSPAM.com> wrote
> >
> >> Ive been reading a little about how to create Dynamic Discs but I
havent
> >> come across anything to explain why I would want to use it over Basic
> >> disks.
> >
> > They basically give you more capability, like being able to
> > span more than one physical drive into a combined logical drive.
> >
> > There are however some downsides too, like if one physical
> > drive dies, all the data in the spanned volume is at risk, not
> > just the data on the single drive that has died. Obviously thats
> > just a nuisance if you are fully backed up etc.
> >
> > Support for dynamic disks is worse with imaging software etc too.
>
> Thanks for replying Rod
>
> So it sounds similar to RAID to me.
>
> I wonder... does it allow drives of different sizes to be combined and
> utilise all the space? Would be great if thats possible. This would allow
me
> to make use of some old small drives I have lying around ie 4-9Gb each.
>

Not RAID, it's JBOD (Just-a-Bunch-Of-Disks), but spanned acroos all those
disk, yes.
Yes, it allows different sized disks to be combined

> If I put them in an external enclosure (connected via firewire or USB)
would
> a dynamic setup be allowed or is that arrangement considered "removable"
and
> therefore not poss?
>

No, as removable disks, if you take (or can take) one out, that would break
the dynamic disk..

> Thanks for your time.
>
> Ian
>
>


--
Tumppi
Reply to group
=================================================
Most learned on nntp://news.mircosoft.com
Helsinki, Finland (remove _NOSPAM)
(translations from FI/SE not always accurate)
=================================================
August 9, 2005 4:46:53 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Some disk utilities don't work with dynamic discs and in fact, even some
applications like Avid don't recommend them. So, they wind up being more
of a pain than anything else.

I'd stay away from them, they create more problems then they solve.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 10, 2005 5:03:11 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"MB" <mb@nospam.com> wrote in message news:42F8DDFD.5010309@nospam.com...
> Some disk utilities don't work with dynamic discs and in fact, even some
> applications like Avid don't recommend them. So, they wind up being
> more of a pain than anything else.
>
> I'd stay away from them,

I'd rather stay away from the (windows) utes that don't support dynamic
disks as they probably aren't programmed the way they should have been:
hardware/software independent.

> they create more problems then they solve.
August 10, 2005 1:47:47 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Utterly Clueless Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:42f9537b$0$15633$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
> "MB" <mb@nospam.com> wrote in message news:42F8DDFD.5010309@nospam.com...
> > Some disk utilities don't work with dynamic discs and in fact, even some
> > applications like Avid don't recommend them. So, they wind up being
> > more of a pain than anything else.
> >
> > I'd stay away from them,
>
> I'd rather stay away from the (windows) utes that don't support dynamic
> disks as they probably aren't programmed the way they should have been:
> hardware/software independent.

Thank you for demonstrating once again that you do not have a clue.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 14, 2005 4:23:59 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 01:03:11 +0200, "Folkert Rienstra"
<see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:

>"MB" <mb@nospam.com> wrote in message news:42F8DDFD.5010309@nospam.com...
>> Some disk utilities don't work with dynamic discs and in fact, even some
>> applications like Avid don't recommend them. So, they wind up being
>> more of a pain than anything else.

This is very timely for me. I was just about to build up a new system
with 4 x 72 GB SCSI drive, and I was planning my partition layout. I
was planning to keep the boot drive as a basic drive, so I could use
boot managers and the like. But using dynamic disks for the other
three drives give me a lot of flexibility in partition sizes. And,
yes, I do back up religiously.

But a thread like this raises yellow flags. So I have to ask:

Which utilities? What kinds of functions? AV? Spyware? Partition
resizing? Backup? Defrag?
>>
>> I'd stay away from them,
>
>I'd rather stay away from the (windows) utes that don't support dynamic
>disks as they probably aren't programmed the way they should have been:
>hardware/software independent.
>
>> they create more problems then they solve.

It seems obvious that an improperly programmed utility would corrupt
the partition table (or whatever it is that MS uses for dynamic
disks). And corrupt the FAT or NTFS entries for a given file.
Anything else? (as though those problems aren't enough!)
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 14, 2005 4:27:17 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:47:47 +0200, "Joep" <available@request.nl>
wrote:

>"Utterly Clueless Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
>news:42f9537b$0$15633$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
>> "MB" <mb@nospam.com> wrote in message news:42F8DDFD.5010309@nospam.com...
>> > Some disk utilities don't work with dynamic discs and in fact, even some
>> > applications like Avid don't recommend them. So, they wind up being
>> > more of a pain than anything else.
>> >
>> > I'd stay away from them,
>>
>> I'd rather stay away from the (windows) utes that don't support dynamic
>> disks as they probably aren't programmed the way they should have been:
>> hardware/software independent.
>
>Thank you for demonstrating once again that you do not have a clue.

Joep,

Instead of flaming Folkert, why not ask him to back up his statement
with facts? We are all better served that way.

If he is clueless, then his response will demonstrate that clearly.
If his response has good information, then in fact he is anything but
clueless. I just posted a followup question, because I am about to
build up a new system and I was planning to use dynamic disks for
three of the four drives in my new system.

This group (like others also) suffers from too much personal invective
and not enough true information exchange.

Maggie
August 14, 2005 8:57:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On 8/14/05 16:23:59, Lady Margaret Thatcher wrote:

>>> Some disk utilities don't work with dynamic discs and in fact, even some
>>> applications like Avid don't recommend them. So, they wind up being
>>> more of a pain than anything else.
>
> This is very timely for me. I was just about to build up a new system
> with 4 x 72 GB SCSI drive, and I was planning my partition layout. I
> was planning to keep the boot drive as a basic drive, so I could use
> boot managers and the like. But using dynamic disks for the other
> three drives give me a lot of flexibility in partition sizes.

> Which utilities? What kinds of functions? AV? Spyware? Partition
> resizing? Backup? Defrag?

IIRC PartitionMagic for example does not work with dynamic disks. You'd
have to check for the utilities that you use. I prefer a hardware
controller -- works with most utilities.

Gerhard
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 15, 2005 3:14:49 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:57:19 -0300, Ge <gefiedler@globo.com> wrote:

>On 8/14/05 16:23:59, Lady Margaret Thatcher wrote:
>

>
>IIRC PartitionMagic for example does not work with dynamic disks. You'd
>have to check for the utilities that you use. I prefer a hardware
>controller -- works with most utilities.

Gerhard,

Hardware controller for what?

You are right about Partition Magic, and pretty much all the utilities
in that class. I once did some digging around and MS has their own
utility for changing partition sizes on dynamic disks.

LMT
>
>Gerhard
August 15, 2005 1:06:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On 8/15/05 03:14:49, Lady Margaret Thatcher wrote:

>>IIRC PartitionMagic for example does not work with dynamic disks. You'd
>>have to check for the utilities that you use. I prefer a hardware
>>controller -- works with most utilities.
>
> Hardware controller for what?

For creating JOBD or RAID configurations.

> You are right about Partition Magic, and pretty much all the utilities
> in that class. I once did some digging around and MS has their own
> utility for changing partition sizes on dynamic disks.

Interesting... could you post a link please?

Thanks,
Gerhard
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 16, 2005 12:24:24 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:06:34 -0300, Ge <gefiedler@globo.com> wrote:

>On 8/15/05 03:14:49, Lady Margaret Thatcher wrote:
>
>>>IIRC PartitionMagic for example does not work with dynamic disks. You'd
>>>have to check for the utilities that you use. I prefer a hardware
>>>controller -- works with most utilities.
>>
>> Hardware controller for what?
>
>For creating JOBD or RAID configurations.
>
>> You are right about Partition Magic, and pretty much all the utilities
>> in that class. I once did some digging around and MS has their own
>> utility for changing partition sizes on dynamic disks.
>
>Interesting... could you post a link please?

Gerhard,

It was a while ago that I did this research. Here is what I came up
with doing a knowledge base search:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/300415/

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308424/

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;323442

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;329707

And of course, most of these KB articles refer to additional article.

LMT

>
>Thanks,
>Gerhard
Anonymous
a b G Storage
August 16, 2005 9:36:24 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Ge <gefiedler@globo.com> wrote
> Lady Margaret Thatcher wrote

>>> IIRC PartitionMagic for example does not work with dynamic
>>> disks. You'd have to check for the utilities that you use. I prefer
>>> a hardware controller -- works with most utilities.

>> Hardware controller for what?

> For creating JOBD or RAID configurations.

>> You are right about Partition Magic, and pretty much all the
>> utilities in that class. I once did some digging around and MS
>> has their own utility for changing partition sizes on dynamic disks.

> Interesting... could you post a link please?

Put diskpart in the online help search for the 2K/XP family of OSs

Its a command line ute that can do that stuff.
August 16, 2005 1:19:59 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On 8/16/05 00:24:24, Lady Margaret Thatcher wrote:

>>> I once did some digging around and MS has their own utility for
>>> changing partition sizes on dynamic disks.
>>
>>Interesting... could you post a link please?
>
> It was a while ago that I did this research. Here is what I came up
> with doing a knowledge base search:

<links to diskpart and related info>

Thanks (also to Rod). I didn't know about diskpart -- seems they are
starting to understand that command line access to admin activities is
essential :) 

But while it provides a command for extending partitions, it doesn't
provide a command for shrinking partitions (the other half of "changing
partition sizes" :) 

For that, 3rd party utilities are still required.

Gerhard
!