From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1S4NEX-0005Zq-1w for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 02:01:05 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C0246E0A52; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 02:00:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from svr-us4.tirtonadi.com (svr-us4.tirtonadi.com [69.65.43.212]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57931E09E4 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 01:58:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vx0-f181.google.com ([209.85.220.181]) by svr-us4.tirtonadi.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S4NBi-0037Zp-UT for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 08:58:10 +0700 Received: by vcge1 with SMTP id e1so2196434vcg.40 for ; Sun, 04 Mar 2012 17:58:08 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of pandu@poluan.info designates 10.52.23.74 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.52.23.74; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of pandu@poluan.info designates 10.52.23.74 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=pandu@poluan.info Received: from mr.google.com ([10.52.23.74]) by 10.52.23.74 with SMTP id k10mr31549641vdf.106.1330912688374 (num_hops = 1); Sun, 04 Mar 2012 17:58:08 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.23.74 with SMTP id k10mr27013642vdf.106.1330912688359; Sun, 04 Mar 2012 17:58:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.58.200 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 17:58:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.58.200 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 17:58:08 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 08:58:08 +0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo on a Dell XPS 13 Ultrabook From: Pandu Poluan To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307c9b5804478004ba754200 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr-us4.tirtonadi.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - poluan.info X-Archives-Salt: 7cccfa2b-6206-4d21-872a-f86575477edb X-Archives-Hash: 891700d55c5c7fb13ba800219d104c93 --20cf307c9b5804478004ba754200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mar 5, 2012 3:15 AM, "Grant" wrote: > > [snip] > >> HOWEVER, make sure that all partitions begin at multiples of 8 (e.g., 64, > >> 72, 80, and so on); this will save you a lot of grief if it happens that the > >> hard disk you're using has 4KiB-sectors. [1] > > > > > > > > From what I recall of looking at that toy's specs, it's running on an > > SSD, so it becomes even more important, performance-wise, to have > > things aligned properly so any one write doesn't cause two full erase > > blocks to be cycled. The 1MB alignment is, if I recall, a balance > > Microsoft struck as the midpoint between multiple hardware vendors to > > work well on any of them... raid arrays, SSDs, advanced format hard > > drives with 4k sectors on-disk, etc. > > Just to confirm, starting at block 2048 is OK? > No problem. You'll just be shortchanged of almost 1MiB. Nothing to lose sleep over, IMO. The most important thing is to make sure that *all* partitions begin on sectors divisible by 8. So, if you're going to set up multiple partitions, eyeball their start sectors carefully. Rgds, --20cf307c9b5804478004ba754200 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8


On Mar 5, 2012 3:15 AM, "Grant" <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >> HOWEVER, make sure that all partitions begin at multiples of 8 (e.g., 64,
> >> 72, 80, and so on); this will save you a lot of grief if it happens that the
> >> hard disk you're using has 4KiB-sectors. [1]
> >
> > <snip the rest>
> >
> > From what I recall of looking at that toy's specs, it's running on an
> > SSD, so it becomes even more important, performance-wise, to have
> > things aligned properly so any one write doesn't cause two full erase
> > blocks to be cycled. The 1MB alignment is, if I recall, a balance
> > Microsoft struck as the midpoint between multiple hardware vendors to
> > work well on any of them... raid arrays, SSDs, advanced format hard
> > drives with 4k sectors on-disk, etc.
>
> Just to confirm, starting at block 2048 is OK?
>

No problem. You'll just be shortchanged of almost 1MiB. Nothing to lose sleep over, IMO.

The most important thing is to make sure that *all* partitions begin on sectors divisible by 8. So, if you're going to set up multiple partitions, eyeball their start sectors carefully.

Rgds,

--20cf307c9b5804478004ba754200--