| 1 |
On Mar 5, 2012 5:10 AM, "Alan McKinnon" <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Correct. Those drives are all the same style as you've |
| 5 |
> been using for years. If partitions start at 63, that's just an msdos |
| 6 |
> convention. For reasons I've never understood, Windows liked to reserve |
| 7 |
> the first 32k for some purpose or other. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Partitions start at sector 63 because traditionally that's the first sector |
| 11 |
of the second cylinder. If the partition starts at a lower sector, then the |
| 12 |
metadata of the filesystem might get split between two cylinders, causing a |
| 13 |
performance impact due to drive head repositioning (older -- like, *really |
| 14 |
old* drives -- have slow and inaccurate actuators; repositioning heads |
| 15 |
takes time because after moving the heads, the location needs some fine |
| 16 |
tuning by reading some calibration data embedded in every cylinder). |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Rgds, |
Archives