From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bill Davidsen Subject: Re: block level vs. file level Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 00:11:17 -0500 Message-ID: <44013875.8080906@tmr.com> References: <43EF8CFB.5080403@kfa.org> <20060212213157.GX32687@strugglers.net> <43EFDDF7.6090405@kfa.org> <62b0912f0602200853m72af5676y4f2dcd07fe358ef8@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <62b0912f0602200853m72af5676y4f2dcd07fe358ef8@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Molle Bestefich Cc: it , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Molle Bestefich wrote: >it wrote: > > >>Ouch. >> >>How does hardware raid deal with this? Does it? >> >> > >Hardware RAID controllers deal with this by rounding the size of >participant devices down to nearest GB, on the assumption that no >drive manufacturers would have the guts to actually sell eg. a 250 GB >drive with less than exactly 250.000.000.000 bytes of space on it. > >(It would be nice if the various flavors of Linux fdisk had an option >to do this. It would be very nice if anaconda had an option to do >this.) > I guess if you care you specify the size of the partition instead of "use it all." I use fdisk usually, cfdisk when installing, both let me set size, fdisk let's me set starting track and even play with the partition table's idea of geometry. What kind of an option did you have in mind? -- bill davidsen CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979