From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Robinson Subject: Re: Adding a smaller drive Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:07:37 +0100 Message-ID: <4A47F7B9.3040003@anonymous.org.uk> References: <20090628212227029.KYDP20969@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> <4A47F438.4070905@anonymous.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4A47F438.4070905@anonymous.org.uk> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: lrhorer@satx.rr.com Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 28/06/2009 23:52, John Robinson wrote: > On 28/06/2009 22:22, Leslie Rhorer wrote: >> I'm not confidant of that presumption. I would not be surprised in >> the least if some manufacturer produced a 1T drive with an actual 999.8G > > If they did that, they'd be lying in describing it as a 1TB drive. I > wish they'd be more honest in the first place and sell them as 931GiB > drives, or make real 1TiB drives, but the marketing literature does at > least explain their definition of TB, GB etc. Maybe it wouldn't be lying if they redefined 1KB to be 998 bytes. I vaguely recall there being an xkcd strip suggesting something similar... Cheers, John.