Span Partition over SSD and HDD

Benjamin Philip · 07 Oct 2017

Hi everyone!
I'm planning to span my D: Drive (which is now a 2 TB HDD) partition over to a new 128 GB SSD.
That partition holds Program Files and Program Files (x86) as alternatives to the ones on my system drive, since that's an SSD too small for all my installed programs and data.

The plan is to have the SSD "first", spanning over to the HDD. I'll save the data on D: to another drive, make the SSD my new D:, create a new partition extending to the old HDD using the spanning method, and put back the files.
The goal is to have most of my installed programs be read from the SSD to minimize load times.

My question is: Will this work? Are there caveats and/or drawbacks I should be aware of?

Both are using internal SATA ports, if that is of any importance.

Thanks, everybody!

cereberus · 07 Oct 2017

This is a really bad plan on many levels for your usage. Spanning is really for commercial setups. Total overkill in a domestic environment.

It makes backups complicated, reinstalls complicated etc.

Use SSD for OS and non portable program. Use HDD for data and to save space on SSD if you need to, put portable programs (games typically e.g. Steam Games).

You need a lot of non-portable programs to fill 128 GB. I have something like 30 including big ones like Office, Adobe etc, and still only use 35 GB on my SSD including OS.

Benjamin Philip · 07 Oct 2017

cereberus said:

This is a really bad plan on many levels for your usage. Spanning is really for commercial setups. Total overkill in a domestic environment.

It makes backups complicated, reinstalls complicated etc.

Use SSD for OS and non portable program. Use HDD for data and to save space on SSD if you need to, put portable programs (games typically e.g. Steam Games).

You need a lot of non-portable programs to fill 128 GB. I have something like 30 including big ones like Office, Adobe etc, and still only use 35 GB on my SSD including OS.

Thanks for replying! :)
I see. The thing is that it's not that easy to separate portable and non-portable data: I have a lot of programs with large amounts of data, like SDKs and music creation. My Adobe CC, Office, etc. are already on my C: SSD. Most of the programs themselves are not portable (meaning having important registry entries), but some of them may have data (like sound banks) which can be moved and reassigned.
I was hoping I could avoiding doing a lot of work for all the programs by simply leaving everything on a partition assigned to D:.

When you say "overkill", what do you mean by that?
AFAIK, I don't need to create backups on a volume-level, file level should be fine.
What do you mean by re-installs becoming more complicated?

My main concern is data loss on both drives in the event of one of them failing, but I'm fine with that, I just got a new backup drive and I'm "feeling lucky"

cereberus · 07 Oct 2017

Benjamin Philip said:

Thanks for replying! :)
I see. The thing is that it's not that easy to separate portable and non-portable data: I have a lot of programs with large amounts of data, like SDKs and music creation. My Adobe CC, Office, etc. are already on my C: SSD. Most of the programs themselves are not portable (meaning having important registry entries), but some of them may have data (like sound banks) which can be moved and reassigned.
I was hoping I could avoiding doing a lot of work for all the programs by simply leaving everything on a partition assigned to D:.

When you say "overkill", what do you mean by that?
AFAIK, I don't need to create backups on a volume-level, file level should be fine.
What do you mean by re-installs becoming more complicated?

My main concern is data loss on both drives in the event of one of them failing, but I'm fine with that, I just got a new backup drive and I'm "feeling lucky"

If you have installed non portable programs to a separate drive, you would have to image backup both drives together (or at least partition on hdd with programs as well as ssd) to be able to recover.

I am not saying you cannot do what you want, but you are making life harder, and I can assure you when Windows 10 tries to upgrade, there is a strong chance it will fall over big time.

I prefer the KISS principle - "Keep It Simple, Stupid" i.e. the less complicated it is, the less that can go wrong.

In the end, the best solution is to simply invest in a higher capacity SDD.

Benjamin Philip · 07 Oct 2017

cereberus said:

If you have installed non portable programs to a separate drive, you would have to image backup both drives together (or at least partition on hdd with programs as well as ssd) to be able to recover. [...]

Wait, what? Isn't all that matters that all the files are in the specified location? Why is an image important?

cereberus · 08 Oct 2017

Benjamin Philip said:

Wait, what? Isn't all that matters that all the files are in the specified location? Why is an image important?

If you are happy to reinstall everything from scratch, if things get corrupted or drive fails, then an image backup is not needed.

On one of my pcs, I recently got a corrupted OS due to an upgrade crapping out. Restored image in less than 30 minutes. It would have taken me many hours otherwise.

dalchina · 08 Oct 2017

I'm planning to span my D: Drive (which is now a 2 TB HDD) partition over to a new 128 GB SSD

If you haven't got the SSD yet, at least get 256Gb- the somewhat greater price (presumably less than when I got mine) will be worth it for you. When I got mine 18 months ago 256Gb was a kind of price break- now I guess it will be quite a bit greater.

Basic ideas on saving space on it:
1. Keep all personal data (frequently but not necessarily in Documents, Videos etc on C:) on a separate disk (or partition).
This is a great idea 'cos the data is then independent of OS maintenance/reinstallation.

2. Install larger programs you really can't fit on your SSD on D:
That's not ideal, as some parts of those programs exist on C: (registry, folders in your user profile etc - even default working space in Documents, Videos etc)
But if you're pushed, and can readily reinstall them if necessary, that's possible for most programs, as most allow you to choose the installation path.

Note: restoring an image (under 1 hour) is much faster than installing an OS, then installing an almost equally large update, then configuring it, then installing all your programs, then restoring data and any other settings... and means you can devote your time and brainpower to much more rewarding things.

Having a disk image set also means that should your disk fail, you can restore your image to a new disk.

It's also a full backup from which you can recover files.

Benjamin Philip · 08 Oct 2017

I always make system image backups of my system drive.
I did buy a 240 GB SSD - I had a 128 GB SSD for my system drive, which was getting full, so I made an image and played it on my new SSD, so my new system drive is now the 240 GB one - that's why I only have a 128 GB one available at the moment.

Of course there will be data stored on C: still.
I am already using my D: drive for data and large programs.

Why is everybody talking about installing and restoring the OS? O.o
I'm simply talking about non-vital, not system related programs.

But I think, all in all, I will re-install some programs on the SSD, so I can manage backups easier (and simply do volume-level images, after all).
The overall opinion seems to be to avoid spanning, so I'll take that as advice and bite the bullet and have one more partition.

Thanks for your input, guys!