[24hoursupport] Re: 1024 cylinder limit and Partition Magic
- From: Joe Parker <joe.parker@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: 24hoursupport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 13:22:39 -0400
>cluster size and overall partition size. When I moved to XP Pro and the
>NTFS system, I kept the same settings mainly because it was convenient.
>Does the cluster size and overhead depend on cluster size under NTFS as
>well?
Sort of. In general, you want 4k clusters in NTFS regardless of partition
size. I think this is the default, unlike in FAT where it would change
depending on the size of the partition. As Fuzzy said, you'll get stuck
with 512 byte clusters if you convert, but with PM you can choose easily.
No reason to partition to try to force a specific cluster size, and as
you've found out, every reason NOT to (shortage of drive letters).
Another reason I liked to partition in Win9x was stability. The blasted
file system might take a nosedive with no notice and wipe out an entire
partition when it did. Not a big worry with a decent OS/filesystem like
WinNT/NTFS.
btw, I've taken to naming all my extra drives with low letters. My 2nd eide
drive is M: (one big 40G partition). My 1394 removables start at N: and go
down (80G, 160G single partitions). This way I don't have to worry about a
system automatically naming a drive the same letter. So far the lowest I've
ever had a system go by itself was J: so I figure I'm safe. For a while. :)
- Users can unsubscribe from this list by sending email to
24hoursupport-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the
Subject field OR by logging into the Web interface at
http://web.tampabay.rr.com/spider1/24hrsupport.htm.
Other related posts:
