Was anyone able to get full capacity (8.0TB [vs 7.86TB]) with 512e format?Update, just needed to do
sg_format --format --size=4096 /dev/da12
=== START OF INFORMATION SECTION ===
User Capacity: 8,001,563,222,016 bytes [8.00 TB]
Logical block size: 4096 bytes
LU is fully provisioned
I see no reason to use 512e in my use-case since I'm working with 4K ashift anyways.
Following the sg_format, the smartctl report was the same except that the 2 >> lines were absent. [but capacity remained 7.86TB]...
User capacity: 7,865,536,647,168 [7.86TB]
Logical block size: 512 bytes
Physical block size: 4096 bytes
>> Formatted with type 1 protection
>> 8 bytes of protection information per logical block
LU is fully provisioned
I thought of trying that, but for me, I'm concerned that I might get stuck at 4Kn. And, I want/need 512e (a little) more than I desire the extra space/speed.Do you think formatting them back to 512e would still yield the same capacity? Or do you think it would go back to 7.86 again?
I often/occasionally make image copies of partitions [between drives] (with dd) and all my other drives are 512e. At that (relatively) low level, I'm pretty sure that the LBA #s need to have the same "geometry" (ie not differ by x8). Anyone have experience that says different?Why do you need 512e?
Shoulda asked earlier. At present I'm copying my entire media collection to a spanned volume consisting of all 4 drives. It's 30 percent into the copy so too late now.I know if I needed to know I'd be willing to compensate you for your time if you could run the test for me.
Intending to use my drives for Napp It storage. DO I need to stay 512e or format to 4k?Was anyone able to get full capacity (8.0TB [vs 7.86TB]) with 512e format?
I did a
sg_format --format --size=512 /dev/sdX
and (13 hours later) the only change was that the "protection information" was no longer reported. The original (pre- sg_format) smartctl reported:
Following the sg_format, the smartctl report was the same except that the 2 >> lines were absent. [but capacity remained 7.86TB]
I'd really like to get that additional 1.5% capacity (and performance), but unlike @SirCrest , I need to stay 512e.
512 # sectorsize 7865536647168 # mediasize in bytes (7.2T) 15362376264 # mediasize in sectors 4096 # stripesize 0 # stripeoffset 956263 # Cylinders according to firmware. 255 # Heads according to firmware. 63 # Sectors according to firmware. HGST H7280A520SUN8.0T # Disk descr. 001703PXB1WV VLKXB1WV # Disk ident. id1,enc@n5001c45000957abd/type@0/slot@3/elmdesc@Slot_002 # Physical path No # TRIM/UNMAP support 7200 # Rotation rate in RPM Not_Zoned # Zone Mode
512 # sectorsize 8001563222016 # mediasize in bytes (7.3T) 15628053168 # mediasize in sectors 4096 # stripesize 0 # stripeoffset 972801 # Cylinders according to firmware. 255 # Heads according to firmware. 63 # Sectors according to firmware. ATA WDC WD80EMAZ-00W # Disk descr. 7HK49B3F # Disk ident. id1,enc@n5001c45000957abd/type@0/slot@4/elmdesc@Slot_003 # Physical path No # TRIM/UNMAP support 5400 # Rotation rate in RPM Not_Zoned # Zone Mode