Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*4k\s+sector\s+drives\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*4k\s+sector\s+drives\s*$/: 27 ]

Total 27 documents matching your query.

1. 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 20:58:27 +0200; Dear list, I don't know who else to ask this: 512 Shouldn't that be 4096? Where is the problem? -- mit freundlichen Grüssen, Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc it-management Internet Services http://proteger; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00221.html (7,844 bytes)
2. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 15:30:00 -0500; Michael Monnerie put forth on 7/20/2010 1:58 PM: Firmware sector size translation is the problem. The WD20EARS is apparently not a native 4096K sector size drive, but a transitional product. It is 4k; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00226.html (7,577 bytes)
3. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 22:39:05 +0200; Le Tue, 20 Jul 2010 20:58:27 +0200 vous écriviez: They come in emulation mode (like many SATA-II drives came in SATA-I mode). You must set them to 4K blocks manually, for WD IIRC with a DOS software.; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00227.html (7,911 bytes)
4. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 23:34:45 +0200; Thank you Emmanuel and Stan, http://wdc-de.custhelp.com/cgibin/wdc_de.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=5324&p_created=&p_cats=185&p_cv=1.185&p_pv=2.294&p_prods=227%2C294#jumper shows a jumper exi; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00228.html (8,730 bytes)
5. RE: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Khelben Blackstaff <eye.of.the.8eholder@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 10:53:45 +0300; No, don't set the jumper. Because DOS required the first head to be empty for some reason and because allmost every geometry uses 63 sectors per track, the first partition usually starts at sector 6; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00237.html (9,312 bytes)
6. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:14:15 +0200; OK, luckily I didn't have time until now :-) I have these: Model=WDC WD20EARS-00MVWB0, FwRev=50.0AB50, SerialNo=WD-WMAZ20035646 Model=WDC WD20EARS-00MVWB0, FwRev=50.0AB50, SerialNo=WD-WMAZ20028252 An; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00238.html (9,140 bytes)
7. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:33:49 +0200; Le Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:14:15 +0200 Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait: From what I've read here and there, apparently they'll always present 512 bytes blocks, bu the sys; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00239.html (8,819 bytes)
8. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Khelben Blackstaff <eye.of.the.8eholder@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 13:33:48 +0300; Your revision numbers are different than mine, because you have the 2TB drive, but i guess its the same for these too. You can try "hdparm -I /dev/sdX" (capital i) or "cat /sys/block/sdX/queue/hw_se; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00240.html (9,791 bytes)
9. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 14:21:55 +0200; Sound good, will try and report back. Thx. -- mit freundlichen Grüssen, Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc it-management Internet Services http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee] Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00244.html (8,815 bytes)
10. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:09:27 +0200; I always do -b size=4096 anyway, so I'm fine here. And I created the partitions starting sector 512, so that should be good also. Thanks, I did this, and it even worked for my other WDC WD2002FYPS-01; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00270.html (11,311 bytes)
11. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Khelben Blackstaff <eye.of.the.8eholder@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:19:21 +0300; I am glad it worked. Disks from the Green series support some features that help the enviroment. Among them is having lower rpm (usually 5400) and the intellipark feature that you set to 120s. If i; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00273.html (9,130 bytes)
12. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 05:58:32 -0400; -b size=4096 is the default anyway, for 4k sector drivers you also want -s size=4096, which you do not want for 512 byte sector disks. What values do the files /sys/block/<device>/queue/logical_block; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00274.html (9,774 bytes)
13. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 05:42:59 -0500; Christoph Hellwig put forth on 7/23/2010 4:58 AM: FWIW, for comparison, my 500GB Blue series WD5000AAKS-00V1A0 shows logical_block_size 512 physical_block_size 512 alignment_offset 0 -- Stan; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00281.html (8,932 bytes)
14. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 06:47:33 -0400; Which means there is absolutely no visible 4k sector support.; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00282.html (8,864 bytes)
15. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:59:07 +0200; Thanks for clarification. Should I use "-s size=4096" despite the drive saying 512b sectors? It's a "hidden" 4K sector drive, so maybe declaring it extra for XFS helps performance? Or does it not mat; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00283.html (10,098 bytes)
16. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:41:10 -0500; Christoph Hellwig put forth on 7/23/2010 5:47 AM: Sorry for the confusion Christoph. I meant for comparison to a plain old 512 byte/sec drive from the same manufacturer. The Western Digital Caviar Bl; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00284.html (10,042 bytes)
17. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:56:23 +0200; Le Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:59:07 +0200 Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait: I'd say it's the right time for a benchmark :) -- -- Emmanuel Florac | Direction technique <eflora; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00285.html (10,234 bytes)
18. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:10:35 -0500; Michael Monnerie put forth on 7/23/2010 5:59 AM: The WD20EARS-00MVWB0 is definitely a 4k sector drive: http://products.wdc.com/Library/Flyer/ENG/2178-771123.pdf If you're currently seeing somewhere b; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00286.html (10,326 bytes)
19. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Matthias Schniedermeyer <ms@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:38:43 +0200; Only for writes, reads are for practically unaffected. The problem for write is the "Read Modify Write" Cycle that is needed when you don't change all 8 512byte "sub-"sectors contained in a 4096 byte; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00287.html (11,164 bytes)
20. Re: 4k sector drives (score: 1): Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:50:34 +0200; Le Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:38:43 +0200 Matthias Schniedermeyer <ms@xxxxxxx> écrivait: Sequential writes may be relatively unaffected too; if you write sequentially a couple of megabytes you'll have only; /archives/xfs/2010-07/msg00288.html (9,883 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]