Parallels on a Fusion drive

[drambuie]

The problem I see with using Parallels on a Fusion drive iMac is that Parallels will install on the 128GB SSD, and will then install Windows on that SSD. The default space Parallels 8 allocates for Windows 7 or 8 is 64GB. I know that this can be reduced, but a typical install of Windows with apps could approach 50GB of valuable SSD real estate, although you will have a snappy Windows installation. You could install Windows with very few applications, but what's the point of that?

If you value your SSD space, it looks like the best bet for installing Windows is to use Bootcamp, which will partition all the space you need for it on the HDD. It may run a bit slower, but the SSD will be saved for OS X.

 

[jonfarr]

k thanks for those words of wisdom.

 

[retepa]

I do not think that would be a problem, because Fusion Drive does not copy the entire file on a SSD, but only the blocks which are often accessed.

 

[forty2j]

If the Parallels app and any part of your Windows installation are on the SSD, it's because you're using <120GB of space or you're using them frequently.

 

[drambuie]

If the Parallels app and any part of your Windows installation are on the SSD, it's because you're using <120GB of space or you're using them frequently.

That's the problem. My iMac is new, and I'm only using about 20GB, with ML, iWorks, and a few utility apps installed so far. It would be nice to have Win 7 booting and running its file system at SSD speeds, but my iMac is primarily an OS X machine, and I want the relatively small SSD dedicated to OS X.

If a partition was created on the 1TB HDD, could Parallels be installed, and seamlessly run in that partition? I know that Bootcamp is probably the best bet for Win 7 or 8, but I have a Parallels 8, and would like to give it a try.

 

[forty2j]

Why do you want to defeat the point of the Fusion drive? If you put more stuff on your drive, and you use other stuff more frequently than Parallels & Windows, then Parallels and Windows will jump over to the HDD automagically.

 

[Kodo1670]

That's the problem. My iMac is new, and I'm only using about 20GB, with ML, iWorks, and a few utility apps installed so far. It would be nice to have Win 7 booting and running its file system at SSD speeds, but my iMac is primarily an OS X machine, and I want the relatively small SSD dedicated to OS X.

If a partition was created on the 1TB HDD, could Parallels be installed, and seamlessly run in that partition? I know that Bootcamp is probably the best bet for Win 7 or 8, but I have a Parallels 8, and would like to give it a try.

FD works per block, not per file.
What you get is the best of both worlds.
And if FD decides to hold all your windows stuff on the SSD, than it's because you use it more often than the MacOS side on your computer and should think about getting a PC and selling your iMac to me(?)



------

Seriously:
It should be possible to create a 2nd partition on your HD. If I understood it right FD will seperate this new partition from its logical volume. Install Parallels in this new partition and you will hide it from being moved to the SSD.
But I wouldn't see any sens in this.

 

[gCloud]

I had a 786 SSD iMac on order (ordered on 14th Feb delivery 4th April), my local apple store had the same spec I wanted but with 1TB fusion, so I went for it.

I need to run several guest VM's on the box, as I have a few customers to support, and each VM will be connected by VPN to a different customer, got this setup running on a non-fusion Mac mini and works a treat.

I found that both VMWare fusion and Parallels run fine and fast on the FD until u run Java RE on the guest VM. that always crashes the VM every time (both on VMWare fusion and Parallels) some of the tools I use need JavaRE so the box is not fit for purpose anymore if the guest vms crash when I run the programs I need ASDM especially.

I am blaming FD because the mini is running the version of OSX, same version of VMWare fusion and Parallels, same amount of RAM.

Any/all ideas welcome.

Thanks.