Installation from scratch

[fvdw]

With the last fvdw partition table, your error messages desappeared ? (I think so) If yes, this is good news but you lost 160GB.

how do you come to 160 GB lost ? :scratch
With the last proposal I made think you loose only 40 cylinders (5*8) of 8225280 bytes each which is 313 MB only (329011200/(1024*1024)

[Jocko]

Yes Fvdw,

You are right (I do again a conversion error). I multiply your result by 512

Note : In fact there are 41 cylinders (the last cylinder isn't used)

[fvdw]

:dry indeed 41 cylinders ;) to my opinion loosing 313 MB on 2 TB is not significant :whistle

[Jocko]

Here a new partition to test :

Code: Select all

      Start        End         Part size      Size /8   start /8'
sda1   64        1028223      1028160      128520.0   8.0
sda2   1028224   2056383      1028160      128520.0   128528.0
sda3   2056384   3084543      1028160      128520.0   257048.0
sda4   3084544   3907024063   3903939520   487992440.0   385568.0
sda5   3084608   4755367      1670760      208845.0   385576.0
sda6   4755432   4883951      128520       16065.0   594429.0
sda7   4884016   5912175      1028160      128520.0   610502.0
sda8   5912240   3907024063   3901111824   487638978.0   739030.0



try to enter this partition table set with sectors (use the values in the column start et end)

Note : if you have an error with sda1, it's not worth continuing
Note : if you have an error with sda4, try to use '3907007999' instead of '3907024063' ( I try to use the orphan sectors)

If it works we lose only 7 sectors (3,5 kB ;) )

[paros]

Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary. Om first partition.
I gues I can use fvdw table.

[Jocko]

Sorry it did not work.

This time it's the end of the partition that is responsible. Still something to be explored.
I'll have to buy one of these disks for testing.

[Jocko]

This message is not an error ! (see http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/ubuntu-63/how-to-fix-partition-not-end-on-cylinder-boundary-768635/#post3754120)

[fvdw]

:disapprove all this effort to gain 300 MB

[paros]

Number was to short for number 5. So I use fvdw table instead.

[Jocko]

@ fvdw,

I stop there to Poros but you know me, I will go after this issue.
It is not a problem for the efforts.

The new table we have for these disck is a work at "Bill Gates", clumsy, not optimization ...