1 |
There's been some talk here recently about partitions versus cylinder |
2 |
boundaries, and when or even if they need to line up properly. |
3 |
|
4 |
I'm confused. For many years now I've ignored "cylinders" completely |
5 |
because I've read that modern disks are addressed by sector number only, |
6 |
and disks don't know or care about cylinders. The "cylinder" seems to |
7 |
be a fiction that sticks around like a drunk who refuses to leave when |
8 |
the party is over. |
9 |
|
10 |
The recent thread about the new disks with 1024-byte sectors has me |
11 |
even more confused. |
12 |
|
13 |
IIUC the new disks *do* care (at least) about where a partition |
14 |
begins relative to it's own 1024-byte hardware sectors, and that |
15 |
part makes perfect sense. |
16 |
|
17 |
But, to me, that still leaves the "cylinder" as a completely useless |
18 |
fiction that needs to join MSDOS in the scrap heap of history. |
19 |
|
20 |
Am I right to separate the 1024-byte sector problem from "cylinders" |
21 |
as being two entirely different and orthogonal ideas? |
22 |
|
23 |
Is there really any need for the "cylinder" these days? |
24 |
|
25 |
Happy Friday :) |