Ext HDD's greater than 137GB under Win ME

[jaclaz]

Put 4080c in 1st line & 8160c (4080c + 4080c)in 2nd line?? How else to "put in the: 4080,4080,4080,4080"? I've tried 10 different ways & still not sure which is correct. Apparently this should be "obvious" but I am far less clear on it than I was the 1st time I attempted this.

I'll try again.

In the "top" line you always enter the MINIMUM value supplied to you by Partition Logic.

In the "bottom" line you always enter 4080c (i.e. the size of the partition)

that will be:

top-bottom

• 0-4080c
  
• 4080-4080c
  
• 8160-4080c
  
• 12240-4080c
  

OR you enter in the Top the Minimum value supplied to you by Partition Logic and in the bottom the progressive End sector:

top-bottom

• 0-4079
  
• 4080-8159
  
• 8160-12239
  
• 12240-16319
  

In other words, since cylinders are numbered from 0:

(4079+1)-0=4080c

(8159+1)-4080=4080c

(12239+1)-8160=4080c

(16319+1)-12240=4080c

I know it is not easy to make calculation with 0 based things, as we are used to use 1 based objects in everyday life, but this is how it works with CHS, think about this:

you cannot have anything less than 0/0/1 (first sector of first head on first cylinder, i.e. the MBR, i.e. sector 0 LBA).

You cannot have more than the max number of heads (let's say 255).

Last head (since they are numbered from 0) is then 254.

You cannot have more than the max number of cylinders (let's say you have a small hard disk with just 1 cylinder).

This small hard disk will start at 0/0/1 and end at 0/254/63.

Since we know that it is exactly 1 cylinder in size, you have to use the formula:

(0+1)-0=1 to calculate it's size in cylinders.

Get SPREAD32 to try using the spreadsheet:

http://www.byedesign.co.uk/

jaclaz

Edited September 26, 2010 by jaclaz

[piikea]

I'll try again.

In the "top" line you always enter the MINIMUM value supplied to you by Partition Logic.

In the "bottom" line you always enter 4080c (i.e. the size of the partition)

that will be:

top-bottom

• 0-4080c
  
• 4080-4080c
  
• 8160-4080c
  
• 12240-4080c
  

OR you enter in the Top the Minimum value supplied to you by Partition Logic and in the bottom the progressive End sector:

top-bottom

• 0-4079
  
• 4080-8159
  
• 8160-12239
  
• 12240-16319
  

In other words, since cylinders are numbered from 0:

(4079+1)-0=4080c

(8159+1)-4080=4080c

(12239+1)-8160=4080c

(16319+1)-12240=4080c

Get SPREAD32 to try using the spreadsheet:

http://www.byedesign.co.uk/

jaclaz

Ok, I have done this just as your 1st set of numbers is listed - 4 primary partitions all at 4080. (I never would've input the numbers that way. I see the basic math but not how its input that way....BUT, I needn't understand it). Below are 2 RPM 2.43 screens w/ partition 2 selected. Numbers are still in red but perhaps the screens will tell you something.

[dencorso]

So... now we have another mystery solved!

Thanks, piikea!

Now we know that RPM is simply complaining these partitions aren't formatted!!!

So format them using Windows Explorer (after it gives each of them a letter and an icon), by right-clicking on the icon and selecting format.

But do not do it with RPM open.

After they're formatted check with RPM to see whethter the became white.

And report, please.

BTW: We'll address those BSODs after the 1 TB HDDs is propperly partittioned and formatted.

[piikea]

Ok I formatted each in Windows (Full but did not run Scandisk on them as it said to), then checked in RPM 2.43 & lines in question were all white in CHS & LBA. Didn't know if you wanted screens.

And yes, I agree the BSOD's can wait.

Oh, & I was able to open the spreadsheets w/ Spread32!

Edited September 26, 2010 by piikea

[dencorso]

Great!

No. No screenshots are needed at this point.

All is well.

Now That we know RPM 2.43 is giving results consistent with Partition Logic, I'll let jaclaz guide you (without my meddling) through the process of getting around to a sensible partitioning scheme.

Things to do latter (so that we don't forget):

1) Troubleshoot the BSODs

2) Get you main HDD back to a state where it doesn't give you the "Booting HD1..." message on boot (OK, I know it's harmless, but it can be fixed).

[piikea]

Great!

No. No screenshots are needed at this point.

All is well.

Now That we know RPM 2.43 is giving results consistent with Partition Logic, I'll let jaclaz guide you (without my meddling) through the process of getting around to a sensible partitioning scheme.

Things to do latter (so that we don't forget):

1) Troubleshoot the BSODs

2) Get you main HDD back to a state where it doesn't give you the "Booting HD1..." message on boot (OK, I know it's harmless, but it can be fixed).

Going to try & get the ext HDD partitioned into 3 or 4 "real world" sizes.

I will wait on the bottom 2 things. It hasn't occurred last couple times I attached USB drives so it may resolve itself.

[dencorso]

Well, I've been thinking and, if I were you, I'd partition your disk with a single primary active 30 GB FAT-32 LBA partition, followed by an extended partition containing 3 logical FAT-32 LBA partitions of about 300 GB each. After formatting, I'd try to scandisk them with the windows version of scandisk, and if all goes well, start using the disk. Only in case the windows version of scandisk complains "there's not enough memory to run", then I'd repartition to smaller partitons, but I do believe the scheme I just proposed can work OK. The primary active 30 GB FAT-32 LBA partition would be left there for that possible future OS installation you mentioned way back in this thread.

Alternatively, a single primary active 250 GB FAT-32 LBA partition, followed by an extended partition containing 3 logical FAT-32 LBA partitions of about 250 GB each is also viable. But do not use 4 primary partitions, each of about 250 GB, because 4 primary partitions is allowed but very non-standard, at least for MS OSes.

[piikea]

Well, I've been thinking and, if I were you, I'd partition your disk with a single primary active 30 GB FAT-32 LBA partition, followed by an extended partition containing 3 logical FAT-32 LBA partitions of about 300 GB each. After formatting, I'd try to scandisk them with the windows version of scandisk, and if all goes well, start using the disk. Only in case the windows version of scandisk complains "there's not enough memory to run", then I'd repartition to smaller partitons, but I do believe the scheme I just proposed can work OK. The primary active 30 GB FAT-32 LBA partition would be left there for that possible future OS installation you mentioned way back in this thread.

Thats what I was thinking & actually trying to work out the numbers for earlier today but it is tricky (esp. when trying not to leave any, or as little as possible, space at the end of the drive). If only PL let you input in GB's & then partitioned it appropriately - allowing one to fine tune it more precisely if need be.

[jaclaz]

If only PL let you input in GB's & then partitioned it appropriately - allowing one to fine tune it more precisely if need be.

That's exactly the reason for the small spreadsheet.

That is to simulate the behaviour and let you fine tune the sizes.

It's not that difficult, you enter numbers in the "Automatic" sheet until you have filled the disk as you like (making sure that values are multiple of 4080).

You see how the result should look in Partition Logic.

Then you enter those values in Partition Logic.

Then you run RPM and change the cylinders number as seen in the top part of the spreadsheet.

Do the test with the base "4080/4080/4080/4080" set.

The values you should change in RPM are:

4079->255

4080->256

8159->511

8160->512

12239->767

12240->768

16319->1023

jaclaz

[piikea]

Do the test with the base "4080/4080/4080/4080" set.

The values you should change in RPM are:

4079->255

4080->256

8159->511

8160->512

12239->767

12240->768

16319->1023

jaclaz

The 4080 numbers (I think) were/are already in the spreadsheet. In any event the drive is partitioned w/ those numbers currently but RPM will only let change the 1st partition's 254 to 255 then only allow me to input 2 & 5 for the 2nd partition & not the "6" (for 256). The lines are white so "right"(??) - I guess? The numbers I ultimately use may not be!

I am rather dense when it comes to numbers, barely passed every math class I've ever taken. I have 10 days to figure it out Or I'll just return the drive.

I thought I was onto something using:

4080

39173

39173

39173

but beg Cyl's & end Head's turned red in spreadsheet. The beg Cyl's in CHS->LBA were already red to begin with.

Edited September 30, 2010 by piikea

[jaclaz]

Here there is no problem with numbers, it must be still some form of communication problem.

You DO NOT want to change the (head) 254 to 255

You DO NOT want to change the (head) 254 to 256

You want to change the (cylinder) 4079 to 255, etc.

1. The first line, that is now:
   0/1/1/4079/254/63
   should become:
   0/1/1/255/254/63
   
2. Second line, that is now:
   4080/0/1/8159/254/63
   should become:
   256/0/1/511/254/63
   
3. Third line, that is now:
   8160/0/1/12239/254/63
   should become:
   512/0/1/767/254/63
   
4. Fourth line, that is now:
   12240/0/1/16319/254/63
   should become:
   768/0/1/1023/254/63
   

I have no other way to explain it.

You DO NOT change Heads.

You DO NOT change Sectors.

You ONLY change Cylinders.

You already have (for the first time) all values "white" (which is good ), BUT currently you created in Partition Logic 4 (four) partitions around 2 Gb (4080x16x63x512) which resulted in RPM in 4 (four) partitions around 32 Gb (4080x255x63x512).

Since you are experimenting with partition sizes around 2 Gb, you want to obtain them in RPM too, before attempting using bigger sizes.

You can simulate the behaviour using the spreadsheet "Automatic", you try the sizes you want, by inputting them in cells U24:U27, in the lower half you see how Partition Logic will deal with them, in the upper part you see the corresponding Cylinder (and NOT Head, and NOT Sector) values you have to change in RPM.

You don't need to be good with numbers, nor even to understand the mathematics arithmetics behind the set of instructions, you simply have to follow a simple set of instructions EXACTLY.

If you don't understand this simple set of instructions, say so, try to communicate which parts you don't understand, and I may be able to further explain those parts in more detail.

jaclaz

[piikea]

You already have (for the first time) all values "white" (which is good ), BUT currently you created in Partition Logic 4 (four) partitions around 2 Gb (4080x16x63x512) which resulted in RPM in 4 (four) partitions around 32 Gb (4080x255x63x512).

Since you are experimenting with partition sizes around 2 Gb, you want to obtain them in RPM too, before attempting using bigger sizes.

You can simulate the behaviour using the spreadsheet "Automatic", you try the sizes you want, by inputting them in cells U24:U27, in the lower half you see how Partition Logic will deal with them, in the upper part you see the corresponding Cylinder (and NOT Head, and NOT Sector) values you have to change in RPM.

jaclaz

Well I will give it a go.

My 2 questions would be:

a.) IF I'm changing the values/numbers in RPM HOW is that doing anything given the values/numbers aren't derived from RPM "examining" the actual drive but from me altering them in RPM?

b.) Why not use the "bigger sizes" (i.e., the real world sizes I'm after) rather than me fumbling & bumbling around w/ "test #'s" only to have to try & replicate the same procedure again later (pulling it off once will be a miracle, twice, a double miracle)?

Anyway, here's the results (when the number changes it seems to add lines??):

Edited October 1, 2010 by piikea

[piikea]

You can simulate the behaviour using the spreadsheet "Automatic", you try the sizes you want, by inputting them in cells U24:U27, in the lower half you see how Partition Logic will deal with them, in the upper part you see the corresponding Cylinder (& NOT Head, & NOT Sector) values you have to change in RPM.

jaclaz

As to the spreadsheet - if I put in these numbers -

makes some columns red -

I haven't the faintest idea what this means at this point but perhaps 36,720 is the highest numbers I can use - IF 38,720 cannot(??).

That makes the ending cylinder: 114,239 thereby "wasting" or leaving space at the end of the drive(?) - total avail being 120,239 (per spreadsheet) - but maybe this is unavoidable(??). Windows already shows the drive at just 931GB so to "lose" more space would not be good.

This is why I said before - you can't just input 31GB for partition 1, 300GB each for the other 3 partitions into PL & have IT sort the cylinders out as necessary (so this user wouldn't be so mystified.

Edited October 1, 2010 by piikea

[dencorso]

This is why I said before - you can't just input 31GB for partition 1, 300GB each for the other 3 partitions into PL & have IT sort the cylinders out as necessary (so this user wouldn't be so mystified.

Well, in GB you cannot do it, but in kB it's possible to do it with RPM alone.

Listen, piikea, do you have perchance about 2 continuous hours to dedicate to it, we might solve this problem for good. I mean, I can guide you step-by-step throught the process, provided that:

1) You're available to do it today

2) You're willing to post many screnshots, one after each step

3) You undetake not to give up before we finish

4) You arm yourself with lots of patience

What do you say?

[piikea]

Well, in GB you cannot do it, but in kB it's possible to do it with RPM alone.

Listen, piikea, do you have perchance about 2 continuous hours to dedicate to it, we might solve this problem for good. I mean, I can guide you step-by-step through the process, provided that:

1) You're available to do it today

2) You're willing to post many screenshots, one after each step

3) You undertake not to give up before we finish

4) You arm yourself with lots of patience

What do you say?

Yes I can check in here by 7PM Pacific time U.S. & give it a shot.

Side note: When I open RPM now I get the MBR/EMBR red "error" message 1st thing so I would think that its referring to my accidentally altered HD1 MBR & not to the ext HDD (although I believe it also occurs on it as well).

Edited October 2, 2010 by piikea