Seems like you are confusing something here - what exactly is your point?Ī hint: you might be confusing "Disk Geometry Information" with "Partition Information". I completely agree that this needs to be updated so that if a user desires 2048-sector offset, they can specify it, or the program can figure it out for itself based on the offset in the original partition table.Ĭlick to expand.Pardon me? Where do I (or anyone in this thread) say anything about sectors per track, or suggest that it would have anything to do with offset? Please detail what about my post is "misinformation".
/image%2F6313489%2F20210524%2Fob_a80f39_minitool-partition-wizard-xfs.png "acronis true image hd ssd alignment xp")
Restoring an unchanged partition table will preserve whatever offset was contained in the original partition table. If you restore an entire disk, however, the TI image contains a copy of the old partition table, which is safe to restore since there will be no changes to the partition layout. The routines called are the same ones (I think) that are used in their partition manager, Acronis Disk Director, which still conforms to the 63-sector offset standard (cylinder alignment). To do this, TI calls its own partition routines to create the new entry. Doing this requires that a new entry be made to the partition table. The reason that a TI restoration forces a 63-sector offset alignment is that when you restore a partition, TI allows it to be resized, converted from primary to logical, etc. Yes, the original topic was imaging, but it's all related. If you want to have more control over the process, convert a partition from primary to logical, or move partitions around, then you'll find third-party partition management tools to be helpful. If you need the second partition to be a logical partition, Vista Disk Management will not allow it. Vista Disk Management, for example, will create primary partitions until you add the fourth, which will become a logical partition. But NOT 63 secors/31,5KB.Īny partition or imaging tool that does not respect this, is obsolete and bad tech by 2009's standards, and should not be used anymore on modern systems in my view.Ĭlick to expand.One reason is that Vista's tools cannot work with Linux partitions. as long as the stipe size divided by alignment delivers an integer value). 2048 was chosen because it covers most raid scenarios up to a stripe size of 1024KB, but any multiple of the stripe size (or allocation block size in SSDs) is a valid alignment as well (i.e.
Acronis true image hd ssd alignment xp windows#
It also applies to all Windows versions, including XP, 2000.
Acronis true image hd ssd alignment xp plus#
This applies for all hard disks in striped RAID arrays, plus most SSDs, not just "future hard disks". Misalignment causes performance degradation in both RAID and SSD usage scenarios. The 2048 sector offset has more (and more important) reasons than just preparing for future large disks.Įven long before Vista, the default 63 sector offset caused misalignemnt in RAID scenarios, as described in this MS bulletin more than 4 years ago: Click to expand.Just use diskpart, it comes with windows, and does not mess with partition aligment if you don't tell it to do so.
0 kommentar(er)
