Windows Partition Scheme

Hey Jow Forums, what is your ideal partition scheme for your Windows desktop/notebook?

Is it necessary to have more than 1 local drive nowadays?
Is D: actually a meme?

Attached: 1543130176608.jpg (1152x864, 70K)

>Jow Forums
>windows

/dev/sda1
/dev/sda2
/dev/sda3

my windows setup:
F: is my EFI partition
R: is the ramdisk
C: is exactly what it always is.

>not mounting by UUID
why would anybody do this?

Almost Based
I use /dev/nvme0np1 ..p2 ..p3

C: is system
D: is human male on female anthro

This is an almost ideal setup:
/dev/nvme0n1p1 for ESP
/dev/nvme0n1p2 for /boot (OSTree)
/dev/nvme0n1p3 is an LVM2 PV
structured in:
/dev/fedora/root is the OSTree rootfs
/dev/fedora/home is /var/home
/dev/fedora/swap for when zram doesn't cut it
The rootfs is OSTree-managed, meaning:
/usr is immutable
/lib, /bin and stuff are symlinked to /usr/*
/etc and /var are the only normally writable directories on the rootfs. /usr can only be modified by OSTree utilities and changes get applied after a reboot
>not using LVM
You absolute niggers

I wouldn't trust using Windows inside Linux in any form; zero day isolation exploits are an unacceptable risk.
More than one local drive used to be relevant before, when the optical drive bay could receive an extra disk with adapters, so that you could have an internal SSD and a hard disk as "D:" for data. Perhaps you may still use some form of solid state memory if your portable has a slot for it.
If you are using a single drive, then a separate data partition would make easier to reinstall the system, *if* you know how to redirect everything to be saved on D:. Nowadays one seldom needs to reinstall Windows, and the management of separate partitions is not worth the hassle.

Someday we will be able to resize encrypted partitions. Someday...