storage configuration for Advanced Format

[Oliver Fromme]

Zeus V Panchenko <zeus.panchenko at gmail.com> wrote:
 > Oliver Fromme (olli at lurza.secnetix.de) [10.10.15 18:44] wrote:
 > > Because the sectorsize _is_ 512 bytes, as seen by the OS.
 > > I don't see how the commands from your first post in this
 > > thread could change that.
 > 
 > oops, sorry :(
 > 
 > than i have to change the initial question ...
 > 
 > what is the correct way to configure hard drive to get the advantagge
 > of the `Advanced Format'?

Which advantage do you mean, exactly?  I can only see
advantages for the disk manufacturers:  They can use a
new buzzword in marketing, they can increase the data
density on the disk platters (which means more revenue
for them), and they can still use 32bit sector numbers
in the disk firmware, which probably makes things a bit
easier and cheaper for them.

I don't see any advantages for the customers.  At least
not with the currently existing disks.

 > fix the list of commands from initial post, please ...

The commands are good.  There's nothing to fix.

The important thing is that every access should be aligned
on 4 KB boundaries.  So you should make sure that your
partitions are all aligned properly, and that the fragment
size of your file systems is at least 4 KB.  Your commands
do that correctly.

(The reason is:  If you write to a block that is not 4 KB
aligned, the drive has to read the affected 4 KB sector
first, modify it, then write it back.  This is inefficient,
of course.)

Best regards
   Oliver

-- 
Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M.
Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606,  Geschäftsfuehrung:
secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün-
chen, HRB 125758,  Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart

FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr:  http://www.secnetix.de/bsd

"People still program in C.  People keep writing shell scripts.  *Most*
people don't realize the shortcomings of the tools they are using because
they a) don't reflect on their workflows and they are b) too lazy to check
out alternatives to realize there is help." -- Simon 'corecode' Schubert