Cluster size ? - experience
- From: "- Bobb -" <bobb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:54:33 -0400
I've got a few new disks and while debating on how to partition them, also thinking of arranging my old " Archive partition" by size. This partitioned area is only for a library - not used normally for disk IO during normal system operation, so it's utilization of space I'm watching not disk IO speed. It's about 175gb now and when I check properties, I can see avg filesize is only 1mb. I do have a lot of larger folders there too, but some of the older folders are copies of old CDs or previous pc folders that have a lot of 1 kb files in there - bringing that " average" down to 1mb. I just made a few partititons and on a 235 gb partition - with 4kb clusters (default), it's already used 72mb in formatting and I haven't "wasted" space with any of my stuff yet. So to not waste so much space on the new drives for old/small stuff, I'm thinking of making a portion formatted as 2kb sectors and then for the large files / obvious backups etc ( 10mb/ 20 mb+ ? files) using ... say 64kb clusters. I've been reading similiar questions via google, and don't want to start a fight about what's "best",
http://www.techspot.com/vb/topic18335.html
just asking for others that set it up with small/large clusters - was it worth it ? Less waste ?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cluster size ? - experience
- From: Poprivet
- Re: Cluster size ? - experience
- From: Rock
- Re: Cluster size ? - experience
- From: Rock
- Re: Cluster size ? - experience
- Prev by Date: Re: 'Unrecognized data' in backup
- Next by Date: Re: Boot Commands / Keys to boot from CD once
- Previous by thread: Re: error message on startup
- Next by thread: Re: Cluster size ? - experience
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|