From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Robinson Subject: Re: Adding a smaller drive Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:20:22 +0100 Message-ID: <4A4F7336.6070800@anonymous.org.uk> References: <20090703161151277.OOAZ19903@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> <4A4F6E68.7030209@tmr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4A4F6E68.7030209@tmr.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bill Davidsen Cc: Linux RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 04/07/2009 15:59, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Leslie Rhorer wrote: >> The 1.5T drives are less than 1.5 times bigger than the 1T >> drives, so I could not replace a 3 drive 1T triplet with a pair of 1.5T >> drives. > > That last sentence is important! If this is a standard, then it would > seem to be actually intended to deceive the consumer. If there is to be > a standard for 1, 1.5, and 2, they really should have some sensible > relationship in size. > > That said, I confess that I use partitions and leave a little breathing > room on my drives when building a raid array. I think I might take to doing that too, making my partitions/arrays multiples of 1,000,000,000 bytes (a drive maker's 1GB) where possible, just to be sure :-) Cheers, John.