Re: Primary vs. Extended partitions
The additional calculations would only be during mount of the
filesystem on the partition.
I prefer to only use primary partitions because I am always
messing with them and they are easier to keep track of
when they are all defined in one place, sector 0,0,0.
I usually use Norton diskedit to create or change my
partitions. I do not trust M$ fdisk it can be brutal.
In spite of the fact that the M$ fdisk prohibits you from
creating more than one primary fat partition, and NT warns you
about it when you do it,I have never had a problem with
accessing multiple fat primary partitions on the same
drive using dos 3.3 and up, OS/2, Win95, NT or Linux.
--Brian N. Borg
Eloy A. Paris wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> the docs. in /usr/doc/lilo are very good to understand the concept of
> primary and extended partitions (and the logical partitions contained
> in these extended partitions). However, I would like to know if there
> is any perfomance hit if extended partitions are used instead of
> primary partitions. I guess more calculations are needed to access a
> specific sector in the hard disk in the case of extended partitions.
>
> Any suggestions on which kind of partitions is better?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> E.-
>
> --
>
> Eloy A. Paris
> Information Technology Department
> Rockwell Automation de Venezuela
> Telephone: +58-2-9432311 Fax: +58-2-9430323
>
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: