| 1 |
Michael, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Thursday, 2020-11-26 00:10:00 +0000, you wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> ... |
| 6 |
> Check dmesg to see if initialisation of the USB 3.0 drive throws up any |
| 7 |
> errors. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
No errors. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> Then check 'lsusb -t' to make sure it has been recognised as a USB |
| 12 |
> 3.0. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
"lsusb -tv" showed the stick to be USB 3.0. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> ... |
| 17 |
> Partitioning the USB drive to use 128KB sectors and |
| 18 |
> then aligning the fs on it should improve matters. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Since the USB sticks contain symbolic links and have to be accessible |
| 21 |
from both, Linux and Windows they are NTFS formatted, and according to |
| 22 |
"mkntfs(8)" the sector size can be at most 4096, while the cluster size |
| 23 |
is limited to 2097152, that is 2G. However, when NTFS formatting an USB |
| 24 |
stick from within TrueCrypt/VeraCrypt or directly in Windows the maximum |
| 25 |
cluster size is 64K, with the only difference that Windows calls it |
| 26 |
"allocation unit size". |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
So I think above you were talking about 128K clusters rather than sect- |
| 29 |
ors. I'll give that a try and will reformat the USB sticks using the |
| 30 |
maximum cluster size of 64K. But I don't see a way to "align" the file |
| 31 |
system on these USB sticks. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
> I found this article which mentions an experiment with ext4 fs. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Thanks for the link you sent in your other mail and thanks for pointing |
| 36 |
all this out :-) |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Sincerely, |
| 39 |
Rainer |
Archives