SSD on a new MacPro

[gugy]

Hi,
I just received today my new MacPro.
I am planning to buy a OWC 120gg SSD and I am wondering how do I migrate my main drive files to the new SSD.
I am planning to use SuperDupper to make a perfect clone of my drive to the new SSD. My main issue is:
I have an iTunes library that is around 100gig and I need to transfer these files (music/video) to a secondary drive and also my iPhoto/Aperture library is around 60 gigs and I need to do the same thing. How do I do this so I can empty enough space and have on my SSD only applications/user files.

Also my final question is, I hear Photoshop benefits a lot from a SSD scratch disk. I am wondering if I buy a small one (40gig) just for that would be substantially beneficial in terms of speed.

I appreciate any help. Thanks!

 

[reel2reel]

I'm not sure about Aperture, but I'm guessing you can just copy the library and point to the new location in your preferences?

For iTunes, though, here's one way:

- go into your iTunes preferences > Advanced. Check the box that says "keep iTunes folder organized."

- in the same tab of your pref's, hit "change" at the top (for the media location) and point it to your new location. iTunes should copy everything over for you if I'm not mistaken.

 

[mrt209]

Also not sure about Aperture, but I'd consolidate the iTunes library, then move the files to your secondary drive. Clone your main drive with the SSD, go into iTunes and point it to the secondary drive where your iTunes library is.

 

[VirtualRain]

I would consider getting a couple of 120GB drives (and running them in a SW RAID0 array) or a larger single 240GB drive and put your OS/Apps/Aperture/Scratch on that larger SSD volume. It will really improve your Aperture workflow if at least your current/recent projects are on your SSD.

I agree with moving such a large iTunes library to mechanical storage though.

BTW, Aperture makes working with multiple libraries in different locations trivial. It doesn't care where the library files are. If you move or create multiple libraries you can open any of them from within Aperture any time.

 

[gugy]

I would consider getting a couple of 120GB drives (and running them in a SW RAID0 array) or a larger single 240GB drive and put your OS/Apps/Aperture/Scratch on that larger SSD volume. It will really improve your Aperture workflow if at least your current/recent projects are on your SSD.

I agree with moving such a large iTunes library to mechanical storage though.

BTW, Aperture makes working with multiple libraries in different locations trivial. It doesn't care where the library files are. If you move or create multiple libraries you can open any of them from within Aperture any time.

Thank you all for the answers.

I not sure if I understood your point about the RAID. I heard it's better to have an empty SSD for scratch disk only for Photoshop. Most of my work is large images in Photoshop and I am wondering if that would make it considerably faster. So I am wondering if I have a 120gig for my system and another 40gig just for scratch would make things faster.

 

[MattDSLR]

I'm not sure about Aperture, but I'm guessing you can just copy the library and point to the new location in your preferences?

For iTunes, though, here's one way:

- go into your iTunes preferences > Advanced. Check the box that says "keep iTunes folder organized."

- in the same tab of your pref's, hit "change" at the top (for the media location) and point it to your new location. iTunes should copy everything over for you if I'm not mistaken.

Thank you
Great info

 

[VirtualRain]

Thank you all for the answers.

I not sure if I understood your point about the RAID. I heard it's better to have an empty SSD for scratch disk only for Photoshop. Most of my work is large images in Photoshop and I am wondering if that would make it considerably faster. So I am wondering if I have a 120gig for my system and another 40gig just for scratch would make things faster.

I don't get the reasoning behind dedicating a small SSD for scratch. I suppose there may be some thinking that heavy scratch usage might burn out a drive faster, so containing it to a small drive minimizes the replacement cost if you burn it out in a few years. However, using a small drive for scratch amplifies the problem of rapid wear to my thinking since there is less NAND to spread the wear across. I also believe the claims of SSD burn out from normal use like scratch are over rated, but the facts are that no one really knows. All I can say is that I've been running 3 small SSD's in RAID0 for 2 years now for all my storage duties including OS, Apps, Scratch, and media storage and haven't had a problem (knock on wood). I suspect most people would likely replace their drives with something cheaper, bigger and faster before wearing them out.

RAID0 is a simple way of combining two disks together in an array that improves performance, but the main benefit for SSD's is really in combining the capacity into a single larger volume. OSX allows you to do this easily when you are installing OSX on them for the first time, you simply use the Disk Utility in the OSX Installer menu to setup the drives together as a RAID0 array.

 

[mjsmke]

You could move your entire home folder to a different drive so your boot drive is just OSX and APPS. Then clone the drive to the SSD. I find it easier having the home folder on a different drive so all downloads/music/desktop ect is kept somewhere else.

 

[gugy]

I don't get the reasoning behind dedicating a small SSD for scratch. I suppose there may be some thinking that heavy scratch usage might burn out a drive faster, so containing it to a small drive minimizes the replacement cost if you burn it out in a few years. However, using a small drive for scratch amplifies the problem of rapid wear to my thinking since there is less NAND to spread the wear across. I also believe the claims of SSD burn out from normal use like scratch are over rated, but the facts are that no one really knows. All I can say is that I've been running 3 small SSD's in RAID0 for 2 years now for all my storage duties including OS, Apps, Scratch, and media storage and haven't had a problem (knock on wood). I suspect most people would likely replace their drives with something cheaper, bigger and faster before wearing them out.

RAID0 is a simple way of combining two disks together in an array that improves performance, but the main benefit for SSD's is really in combining the capacity into a single larger volume. OSX allows you to do this easily when you are installing OSX on them for the first time, you simply use the Disk Utility in the OSX Installer menu to setup the drives together as a RAID0 array.

Cool, THanks for the reply. I just heard somewhere that it would preserve the SSD drive longer. I wasn't not sure it's true. Just checking.
I have a lot of videos/music and work so I need to keep my standard hard drives and use the SSD just for apps/user folder. That way I can save the space and just get by with a 120gig from OWC that costs $230. Too bad SSD's still so expensive.

 

[gugy]

You could move your entire home folder to a different drive so your boot drive is just OSX and APPS. Then clone the drive to the SSD. I find it easier having the home folder on a different drive so all downloads/music/desktop ect is kept somewhere else.

Interesting.

 

[VirtualRain]

Cool, THanks for the reply. I just heard somewhere that it would preserve the SSD drive longer. I wasn't not sure it's true. Just checking.
I have a lot of videos/music and work so I need to keep my standard hard drives and use the SSD just for apps/user folder. That way I can save the space and just get by with a 120gig from OWC that costs $230. Too bad SSD's still so expensive.

Having your OS/Apps on an SSD is a no brainer these days. However, it seems like a half baked solution to me. People spending $3-$5K on a Mac and balking at another 10% investment to get their entire workflow on solid state storage seems irrational.

It seems many people would rather spend another $1K on a second processor they will rarely use, instead of a bigger SSD that they would benefit from every time they do some work.



Anyway, this is not aimed at you in particular, as I don't know your complete situation and constraints, but a general observation in general.

 

[gugy]

Having your OS/Apps on an SSD is a no brainer these days. However, it seems like a half baked solution to me. People spending $3-$5K on a Mac and balking at another 10% investment to get their entire workflow on solid state storage seems irrational.

It seems many people would rather spend another $1K on a second processor they will rarely use, instead of a bigger SSD that they would benefit from every time they do some work.



Anyway, this is not aimed at you in particular, as I don't know your complete situation and constraints, but a general observation in general.

Thanks I understand your point.
I was just curios to see what would be the best workflow for me using Photoshop as my main software. I will take a look on the RAID0 solution you described it.
Take care

 

[dhro1]

I used this guide to move the home folder and have separate home and application drives:

http://chris.pirillo.com/how-to-move-the-home-folder-in-os-x-and-why/