SSD + HDD: an OPTIMAL partitioning scheme
 

These are some specs of my new system:
MOTHERBOARD=Biostar 880GU3+
CPU=AMD FX(tm)-8120 Eight-Core Processor,
RAM=16G, 1333MHz

INTERNAL HARD DRIVES={
SSD=64GB SATA3 Solid State Drive (SSD), M4-CT064M4SSD2
HDD=2TB SATA3 - 6gb/sec 7200RPM (64MB Cache) Hard Drive, ST2000DL003-9VT1
}

My plan is to install Archlinux.
I may be doing some numerical methods, image processing and video editing.


I’ve been picking some ideas here and there.

Here is a tentative partition plan:

SSD: Partition table: GPT, Boot loader: GRUB2
Partition Size Filesystem
/boot 100M ext4
/home (100% - [/boot+/]) ?
/ 15G ext4

HDD: Partition table: DOS
Partition Size Filesystem
/var 10G jfs
/tmp 500M jfs
/home/bulk (100% - [all others]) jfs

/home/bulk is for massive storage.

I will highly appreciate both tips and corrections to optimize the partitioning scheme.
Thanks for reading this.

The principle is that the SSD has very fast read rates, but slower and limited writes.

So, on the SSD you put things that are unlikely to change often, but are used or read often. On the HDD you put things that you write very often.

Personally I would put all of /home on the HDD, but it may work like you are gonna do as long as you don't put things on the SSD that are written to a lot.

Also do take into account this filesystem benchmark:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...38_large&num=1

You may want to put JFS on the SSD and ext4 on the HDD.

Member response
 

Hi,
Read the rest of the review for benchmarks. Not a bad SSD for the price. As to the limited writes: I think that the "260MB/s writes with support for up to 72TBW' is damn good!

As a SSD user the Crucial m4 SSD unit fits for any of my demands. I would not worry about what 'H' says about 'The principle is that the SSD has very fast read rates, but slower and limited writes.' Sorry 'H' but 5 yrs for 72TBW is a long time for that many writes. Your likely to upgrade or replace long before the drive would show signs of failure. That is as long as your Motherboard and kernel supports the SSD SATAIII properly. SSD drive technology is evolving and will soon replace the mechanical drives as the base drive. Patriot, Crucial, OCZ and Intel are just a few manufactures that are leading technological changes.

Micron Tech has acquired Crucial and is developing new designs for the controller & drive technology. Micron now has this;
RealSSD has MTBF 1.2 Million Hours.

Look at the benchmarks from Crucial m4 SSD and make your decision. Good bang for the buck!

Another good site for reference is SSDWiki. Read 'SSD vs Hard Drives at the bottom of page, good FAQ.

HTH!

Thanks a lot guys for the info and the comments. I'm getting the hang of using SSDs and I'm quite excited about them.

JFS vs. EXT4 for SSD
 

@H_TeXMeX_H:

Thanks again for the link to the phoronix benchmarks. They clearly suggest that JFS would be a great choice for my SSD.
However, only EXT4 supports TRIM.

So, my dilemma would be:

1. Use JFS and do without TRIM, hoping that it is not relevant for my particular setting.
2. Use EXT4 in order to have TRIM, hoping that it is relevant enough to justify a somewhat lower performance than JFS in other aspects.

I have 80G SSD and 320G HDD. The first one is split between swap, / and an extra / for upgrades, other OS installs, etc. I strongly recommend to keep at least 10G in reserve for a new install. All my /home is on HDD (and only it). SSD partitions are mounted with 'noatime' and 'discard' options.
You may also move /tmp to ram if you have a lot of that ;-)

Loading some large data would be potentially faster using /home at ssd, but I need it no more than about 1-2 times a day. So this setup perfectly suits my needs.

Thanks for all the help and tips.
Currently usinf jfs for the ssd and ext4 for the hd. Performance (my perception only) is good.
I'm marking this thread solved.