| To: | Hillel Lubman <shtetldik@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: What is a recommended XFS sector size for hybrid (512e) advanced format hard drives? |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 06 Jan 2015 23:30:26 -0600 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <2511571.nTXGg0tW6M@shtub-cm> |
| References: | <1806495.BCZcrVVEOf@shtub-cm> <54AC1511.1060908@xxxxxxxxxxx> <2511571.nTXGg0tW6M@shtub-cm> |
On 1/6/15 11:17 PM, Hillel Lubman wrote: > I see. Indeed, on the drive where I get sectsz as 512 by default, blockdev > --getss --getpbsz reports: > > 512 > 512 what kind of drive is this; is it usb, SATA, or ? > However hdparm -I reports: > > Logical Sector size: 512 bytes > > Physical Sector size: 4096 bytes > > So is it still worthwhile making sectsz 4 KB explicitly instead of > using mkfs.xfs default in such case? And on a side note, since there > is a more reliable way to figure that info out, may be mkfs.xfs > should rather use that? > a) probably can't hurt b) probably doesn't matter ;) c) not sure why there are 2 different answers. Knowing what kind of drive it is would be good; mkfs.xfs just uses whatever blkid says. -Eric |
| Previous by Date: | Re: What is a recommended XFS sector size for hybrid (512e) advanced format hard drives?, Hillel Lubman |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: What is a recommended XFS sector size for hybrid (512e) advanced format hard drives?, Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: What is a recommended XFS sector size for hybrid (512e) advanced format hard drives?, Hillel Lubman |
| Next by Thread: | Re: What is a recommended XFS sector size for hybrid (512e) advanced format hard drives?, Hillel Lubman |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |