From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mx3.redhat.com (mx3.redhat.com [172.16.48.32])
	by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.6) with ESMTP id
	k3INI8U2030778
	for <linux-lvm@redhat.com>; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 19:18:08 -0400
Received: from mail.davidb.org (mail.davidb.org [66.93.32.219])
	by mx3.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k3INI1ij009458
	for <linux-lvm@redhat.com>; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 19:18:02 -0400
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:18:00 -0700
From: David Brown <lvm@davidb.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] physical volume smaller than partition?
Message-ID: <20060418231800.GA32309@old.davidb.org>
References: <AAB83747-D6F3-4148-9836-7E22B8AD9ABF@isg.si>
	<4445294D.6050500@conterra.de>
	<CDF11F32-D2D3-47EB-8B00-E91614CEA795@isg.si>
	<44454E8E.70800@hathawaymix.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <44454E8E.70800@hathawaymix.org>
Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com>
List-Id: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm.redhat.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm>,
	<mailto:linux-lvm-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-lvm>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-lvm@redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-lvm-request@redhat.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm>,
	<mailto:linux-lvm-request@redhat.com?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: <linux-lvm.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com>
Cc: Dieter =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=FCken?= <stueken@conterra.de>

On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 02:39:42PM -0600, Shane Hathaway wrote:

> Interestingly, this means drive manufacturers are not misleading 
> consumers after all.

It is still common to round and even just blatantly exaggerate.

I used to have a "640MB" MO drive from Fujitsu.  Total capacity was about
635 million bytes, or about 605 MiB.

Dave