Is it possible to install XP on RAID0 with clusters greater than 4k?

[pengo]

G'day

A mate mentioned to me that windows setup will fail to install windows if you install it onto a preformated raid partition with clusters greater than 4k.

I want to setup a raid0 array with 32k clusters, so with what my mate said this won't work.

He went on to say i need to copy vfat.sys, ntfs.sys and parted.sys from an original (pre-sp1/sp2) install disk and replace them on my sp2 disk.

Anyway does anyone know anything about what my mate is going on about? Apparently there is some guide on the net explaining this problem and a fix (as above) but I can't seem to find it.

Would be curious to know if this holds any water, guess I'll find out eventually tho when I get around to installing windows

Thanks

Edited September 22, 2007 by pengo

[pengo]

http://forum.abit-usa.com/showpost.php?p=4...mp;postcount=17

Ok well answered my own question and provided myself with the solution.

I post it here for the benefit of others, but to sum it up SP2 stuffs up the bootstrap so you need files from an original xp or sp1 setup cd..

Have a read of the above post for how to fix.

[nmX.Memnoch]

Just curious...why do you want to use 32K clusters? I can see wanting to change the stripe size on the RAID array, but ideally you want to use the smaller cluster size to reduce wasted space on the volume. Look at it this way. A 1K file on a volume using 4K clusters will only take up 4K of space on the disk/array. But a 1K file on a volume using 32K clusters will take up a full 32K of space on the disk/array. So, supposing you had 100 1K files on your volume, compare the wasted space:

100 1K x 4K clusters = 400K

100 1K x 32K clusters = 3200K

To put it simply, a single cluster cannot contain more than one file (one file can be more than one cluster though). So a 1K file would take 32K, a 2K file would take 32K space, a 48K file would take 64K space, etc, etc. Basically you're going to end up with a lot of dead space that you can't use.

If you notice in Windows XP when you look at the properties of a directory to get the size, it gives you the actual size and the "Size on disk:". The "Size on disk:" is the amount of space it's actually using on the disk. The difference between the "Size:" and the "Size on disk:" is empty space that can't be used. The greater the cluster size, the greater the potential for empty space that can't be used.

Edited September 23, 2007 by nmX.Memnoch

[pengo]

Thanks for the reply..

Yeah I'm aware on the relation to clusters and file size etc. Thanks all the same tho.

Space is cheap and I use 32k for better disk performance.

I have 160gb hdd atm, and will have a 500gb raid 0 volume... I'm not too worried about wasted space.. I'm more after the best disk performance I can get with my current setup.

Edited September 23, 2007 by pengo

[RJARRRPCGP]

G'day

A mate mentioned to me that windows setup will fail to install windows if you install it onto a preformated raid partition with clusters greater than 4k.

I want to setup a raid0 array with 32k clusters, so with what my mate said this won't work.

He went on to say i need to copy vfat.sys, ntfs.sys and parted.sys from an original (pre-sp1/sp2) install disk and replace them on my sp2 disk.

Anyway does anyone know anything about what my mate is going on about? Apparently there is some guide on the net explaining this problem and a fix (as above) but I can't seem to find it.

Would be curious to know if this holds any water, guess I'll find out eventually tho when I get around to installing windows

Thanks

I never heard of a 4 KB cluster limit with Windows XP.

With Windows 2000, you can't defrag NTFS partitions with clusters bigger than 4 KB. That limit don't exist with Windows XP.

Edited September 23, 2007 by RJARRRPCGP

[Camarade_Tux]

In fact, there is probably one and this has already been discussed here at msfn.

http://www.msfn.org/board/Disk_read_error_...92k_t62546.html