Hi Carl,
PMJI,
Carl Knerr wrote:
I had read previously was that the monolithic file offered better performance. Is that not the case in your experience?
Not really no. Sure there might be a very marginal performance difference in a laboratory performance benchmarking test, but in day to day live you will never notice a performance difference. There's no good reason - in my opinion - to use a big monolithic file for your virtual disk on a desktop product like Fusion as it only has downsides.
Carl Knerr wrote:
I don't see the harm in having a 70GB monolithic file on a 256GB drive. I often run it on a different PC with only a 148GB drive. Do you feel that splitting this into separate files is better when limited by disk space? if so, how so?
Reread Woody's remark about taking a snapshot. Whenever you do a disk operation on the host end of things (like a snapshot) you'll end up having a need of more as 70GB free disk space in order to complete that operation. You can run your VM with less space available, but committing a snapshot will cause problems and might possibly corrupt your VM if it does not have enough free space.
With the 2GB sparse files disk, these disk operations are done on 2GB at a time and you will only need a bit more as 2 GB of free space in order to do so.
--
Wil