<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:clearspace="http://www.jivesoftware.com/xmlns/clearspace/rss" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:opensearch="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>VMware Communities: Message List - Partition Question</title>
    <link>http://communities.vmware.com/community/vmtn/vi/install?view=discussions</link>
    <description>Most recent forum messages</description>
    <language>en</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 07:17:15 GMT</pubDate>
    <generator>Clearspace 1.10.12 (http://jivesoftware.com/products/clearspace/)</generator>
    <dc:date>2009-01-07T07:17:15Z</dc:date>
    <dc:language>en</dc:language>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Partition Question</title>
      <link>http://communities.vmware.com/message/1137722?tstart=0#1137722</link>
      <description>my personal preference is not to have a VMFS above 500 G, i'd consider using RDM for the D &amp;#38; E drives but it will also be dictated by your backup method as to what gives most resilience and recovery.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 07:17:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>whynotq</author>
      <guid>http://communities.vmware.com/message/1137722?tstart=0#1137722</guid>
      <dc:date>2009-01-07T07:17:15Z</dc:date>
      <clearspace:dateToText>10 months, 3 weeks ago</clearspace:dateToText>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Partition Question</title>
      <link>http://communities.vmware.com/message/1137553?tstart=0#1137553</link>
      <description>&lt;div class="jive-quote"&gt;What is the best practice regarding the guest partition configuration in a situation as described above? Is it better to use 1 &lt;b&gt;large virtual disk&lt;/b&gt;, or three smaller ones, or does it make any difference?&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1 &lt;b&gt;large virtual disk&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Not really any difference since your VM will have only 1 SCSI controller virtualized on one HBA on the ESX host, so performance wise and sanity it's better to just have 1 disk partitioned... but I question why you are partitioning in the first place.  I am never a fan of partitioning...</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:52:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>RParker</author>
      <guid>http://communities.vmware.com/message/1137553?tstart=0#1137553</guid>
      <dc:date>2009-01-06T23:52:08Z</dc:date>
      <clearspace:dateToText>10 months, 3 weeks ago</clearspace:dateToText>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Partition Question</title>
      <link>http://communities.vmware.com/message/1137517?tstart=0#1137517</link>
      <description>&lt;br /&gt;
I am installing a single ESX 3.5 server into a remote office.  The ESX server will be connected to an AX4 SAN, with approximately 3.5 TB usable space.  The ESX server will support a single Windows 2003 server with three partitions, as follows: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p /&gt;
C: - 25 GB &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p /&gt;
D: - 800 GB &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p /&gt;
E: - 250 GB &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p /&gt;
What is the best practice regarding the guest partition configuration in a situation as described above?  Is it better to use 1 large virtual disk, or three smaller ones, or does it make any difference? &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p /&gt;
Thank you.</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:29:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>John Johnston</author>
      <guid>http://communities.vmware.com/message/1137517?tstart=0#1137517</guid>
      <dc:date>2009-01-06T23:29:49Z</dc:date>
      <clearspace:dateToText>10 months, 3 weeks ago</clearspace:dateToText>
      <clearspace:replyCount>2</clearspace:replyCount>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

