If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
SSD partition alignment revisited
Hi All,
I have a trim tool on my netbook. There are two SSD drives, 64GB xSD and an internal 32GB PATA SuperTalent SSD. Trim of the 64GB drive gives no complaints and reports, 16 MB partition offset. That is to say, 16MB at the beginning of drive is free. Trim would complain about bad alignment on C: drive, so I used Partition Magic LIVE CD to change the front end alignment. Maybe I used the wrong tool.. Maybe I'm confused about start and end points of partitions. BTW, CrystalDiskInfo reports a 1 KB buffer size on 32GB SuperTalent SSD and CrystalDiskMark reports now improved R/W performance. 1 KB buffer size seems low. Could this reflect formatting options selected? Thanks. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
SSD partition alignment revisited
Norm X wrote:
Hi All, I have a trim tool on my netbook. There are two SSD drives, 64GB xSD and an internal 32GB PATA SuperTalent SSD. Trim of the 64GB drive gives no complaints and reports, 16 MB partition offset. That is to say, 16MB at the beginning of drive is free. Trim would complain about bad alignment on C: drive, so I used Partition Magic LIVE CD to change the front end alignment. Maybe I used the wrong tool.. Maybe I'm confused about start and end points of partitions. BTW, CrystalDiskInfo reports a 1 KB buffer size on 32GB SuperTalent SSD and CrystalDiskMark reports now improved R/W performance. 1 KB buffer size seems low. Could this reflect formatting options selected? Thanks. PTEDIT32 could report both the beginning of a partition and the length of a partition, in 512 byte sectors. This allows users to verify whether all numbers in the display are divisible by 63 or by some power_of_two number (megabyte alignment). It gives me some idea of the alignment. So that's how I would figure that out. If it took the Parted tool a while to complete the move, then it probably did rewrite the entire partition. The buffer on the SuperTalent could be based on the packet size of the interface, and how large a packet it can accommodate. The thing would refer to "Cache", if as a drive, it had a cache RAM. At first, SSD makers were timid about putting cache on SSDs and there was none. Now, modern SSDs have gained a single DRAM chip of respectable size. A disadvantage of doing that, is if the power fails, consumer SSDs don't have a supercap inside, and it's going to be "interesting" to get any DRAM cache emptied before the power is completely gone. So just be happy the only hardware appears to be a "buffer", meaning there is less volatile data in danger of being lost. It doesn't sound like you changed the cluster size. The alignment affects the alignment of clusters to flash pages. A power-of-two choice means it is likely the clusters are on flash page boundaries. NTFS clusters range from 4KB to 64KB. The nominal 4KB selection sounds low, but it also happens to match the size of pagefile allocations, and it suits both EFS encryption and NTFS compression (if you choose to turn those on for some reason). Selecting 64KB clusters is preferred for data-only partitions, but only as a function of file size. If you have a 4TB drive, and it will be holding an infinite number of 7GB DVD ISO files, then 64KB is perfect for those. If you have an infinite number of 2KB text files containing your poetry compositions, 64KB clusters is a poor choice for that. Because the cluster remainder is 62KB and you're wasting the drive at a high rate. On this computer, all my data partitions are NTFS 64K. And any modern OSes with NTFS C:, they would be 4KB. Paul |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
SSD partition alignment revisited
On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 14:41:21 -0400, Paul
wrote: Norm X wrote: Hi All, I have a trim tool on my netbook. There are two SSD drives, 64GB xSD and an internal 32GB PATA SuperTalent SSD. Trim of the 64GB drive gives no complaints and reports, 16 MB partition offset. That is to say, 16MB at the beginning of drive is free. Trim would complain about bad alignment on C: drive, so I used Partition Magic LIVE CD to change the front end alignment. Maybe I used the wrong tool.. Maybe I'm confused about start and end points of partitions. BTW, CrystalDiskInfo reports a 1 KB buffer size on 32GB SuperTalent SSD and CrystalDiskMark reports now improved R/W performance. 1 KB buffer size seems low. Could this reflect formatting options selected? Thanks. PTEDIT32 could report both the beginning of a partition and the length of a partition, in 512 byte sectors. This allows users to verify whether all numbers in the display are divisible by 63 or by some power_of_two number (megabyte alignment). It gives me some idea of the alignment. I have tried in vain to find a valid URL for this program. Any help on a valid currently wording link? So that's how I would figure that out. If it took the Parted tool a while to complete the move, then it probably did rewrite the entire partition. The buffer on the SuperTalent could be based on the packet size of the interface, and how large a packet it can accommodate. The thing would refer to "Cache", if as a drive, it had a cache RAM. At first, SSD makers were timid about putting cache on SSDs and there was none. Now, modern SSDs have gained a single DRAM chip of respectable size. A disadvantage of doing that, is if the power fails, consumer SSDs don't have a supercap inside, and it's going to be "interesting" to get any DRAM cache emptied before the power is completely gone. So just be happy the only hardware appears to be a "buffer", meaning there is less volatile data in danger of being lost. It doesn't sound like you changed the cluster size. The alignment affects the alignment of clusters to flash pages. A power-of-two choice means it is likely the clusters are on flash page boundaries. NTFS clusters range from 4KB to 64KB. The nominal 4KB selection sounds low, but it also happens to match the size of pagefile allocations, and it suits both EFS encryption and NTFS compression (if you choose to turn those on for some reason). Selecting 64KB clusters is preferred for data-only partitions, but only as a function of file size. If you have a 4TB drive, and it will be holding an infinite number of 7GB DVD ISO files, then 64KB is perfect for those. If you have an infinite number of 2KB text files containing your poetry compositions, 64KB clusters is a poor choice for that. Because the cluster remainder is 62KB and you're wasting the drive at a high rate. On this computer, all my data partitions are NTFS 64K. And any modern OSes with NTFS C:, they would be 4KB. Paul |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
SSD partition alignment revisited
wrote:
On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 14:41:21 -0400, Paul PTEDIT32 I have tried in vain to find a valid URL for this program. Any help on a valid currently wording link? Originally, it was a utility in the PowerQuest Partition Magic product. Then Symantec bought PowerQuest. And Symantec made PTEDIT32.exe available on their FTP site. The FTP contents were cleared out recently, and it's gone. And archive.org only archives web sites, not FTP sites, so there are no secondary copies. ******* OK, so let's get creative. This appears to be a trial version of PM8, with PowerQuest branding inside. You don't need to install this! http://www.download3k.com/System-Uti...ion-Magic.html enpm800retaildemo.zip 23,776,770 bytes Using 7ZIP, have a look inside the ZIP archive. Normally, with things like InstallShield cabs, you can't get inside them with 7ZIP. For some reason this one is open. L:\enpm800retaildemo.zip\Setup\PMagic.cab\ PTEDIT32.EXE 503,808 bytes September 16, 2002, 2:24:48 AM And these are the copies I have already. I don't have the 2002 version, as I bought PM7 to get the 2001 version. So this file is new to me. 379,392 bytes February 18, 1999, 3:01:00 AM 501,760 bytes August 10, 2001, 7:00:00 AM The scan on the new one is clean. The file also has a special status. "National Software Reference Library (NIST)" Normally, that status was reserved for some big CDs that were too big to upload to virustotal, so the entries are manually inserted by the staff. I don't know what that means for a crusty old file like this. https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/b...d5f0/analysis/ I tried it, and it has the traditional appearance. Note that, on newer OSes, if you just double click, it will give "Error 5". You need to right-click the EXE and "Run as Administrator" to use it on something like Win10. Good luck, Paul |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
SSD partition alignment revisited
On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 01:04:23 -0500, Paul
wrote: wrote: On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 14:41:21 -0400, Paul PTEDIT32 I have tried in vain to find a valid URL for this program. Any help on a valid currently wording link? Originally, it was a utility in the PowerQuest Partition Magic product. Then Symantec bought PowerQuest. And Symantec made PTEDIT32.exe available on their FTP site. The FTP contents were cleared out recently, and it's gone. And archive.org only archives web sites, not FTP sites, so there are no secondary copies. ******* OK, so let's get creative. This appears to be a trial version of PM8, with PowerQuest branding inside. You don't need to install this! http://www.download3k.com/System-Uti...ion-Magic.html enpm800retaildemo.zip 23,776,770 bytes Using 7ZIP, have a look inside the ZIP archive. Normally, with things like InstallShield cabs, you can't get inside them with 7ZIP. For some reason this one is open. L:\enpm800retaildemo.zip\Setup\PMagic.cab\ PTEDIT32.EXE 503,808 bytes September 16, 2002, 2:24:48 AM And these are the copies I have already. I don't have the 2002 version, as I bought PM7 to get the 2001 version. So this file is new to me. 379,392 bytes February 18, 1999, 3:01:00 AM 501,760 bytes August 10, 2001, 7:00:00 AM The scan on the new one is clean. The file also has a special status. "National Software Reference Library (NIST)" Normally, that status was reserved for some big CDs that were too big to upload to virustotal, so the entries are manually inserted by the staff. I don't know what that means for a crusty old file like this. https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/b...d5f0/analysis/ I tried it, and it has the traditional appearance. Note that, on newer OSes, if you just double click, it will give "Error 5". You need to right-click the EXE and "Run as Administrator" to use it on something like Win10. Good luck, Paul Well I got it so thank you. Have no idea how long that URL will last before Symantec yanks it. I'd grab it now and stow it in case one needs it later. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
USB version revisited | Ken Knecht | Compaq Computers | 3 | March 11th 05 05:24 AM |
Optiplex GX-150 revisited | Mikko Peltoniemi | Dell Computers | 5 | June 15th 04 02:45 AM |
NF7-M Nighmare Revisited | Erik Alvar | AMD Thunderbird Processors | 1 | December 8th 03 02:01 AM |
NF7-M Nighmare Revisited | Erik Alvar | Overclocking AMD Processors | 0 | December 7th 03 10:01 PM |
apature revisited | JAD | Ati Videocards | 4 | September 5th 03 03:18 AM |