>> >> [snip] >> >>>> 1. fdisk won't let me specify a start block before 2048 even >> >>>> though I deleted all partitions. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> That's normal. It's a long story, but Windows Vista and Windows 7 >> >>> expects the first partition to start at sector 2048. >> >>> >> >>> You can force a lower number by toggling "DOS compatibility"; >> >>> this should let you start the first partition as low as sector 63. >> >>> >> >>> 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. >> >> >> >> I just looked up the start block for my other systems and they're >> >> all on 63. Is performance impacted on all of these systems since >> >> they aren't started on 64? >> >> >> >> - Grant >> >> >> > >> > The performance is only impacted if the sector size is something >> > other than 512 bytes. The newer 4K sector size used by some higher >> > density drives requires that you start partitions on a sector >> > boundary or they will perform badly. There isn't an actually >> > performance need to actually start on 2048 but the fdisk-type >> > developer folks are doing that to be more compatible with newer >> > Windows installations. >> >> All my drives says this from fdisk: >> >> Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes >> Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes >> I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes >> >> So it doesn't matter where the first partition starts? > > Correct. Those drives are all the same style as you've > been using for years. If partitions start at 63, that's just an msdos > convention. For reasons I've never understood, Windows liked to reserve > the first 32k for some purpose or other.
So fdisk used to enforce a block 63 start point and now it enforces a 2048 start point? fdisk is the one doing this? - Grant
