Re: RAID Sizes (was Re: Why do people in the UK put a u in the word color?)
On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 12:27:35PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 06:30 -0400, hendrik@topoi.pooq.com wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 10:25:28AM +0100, Wulfy wrote:
> > > CaT wrote:
> > > >Because dividing by a multpile of 10 essentially simply moves the
> > > >decimal point to the left. The thing that's not bleedingly obvious
> > > >there though is that 156290816 is in kibibytes. :) So:
> > > >
> > > >156290816 * 1024 / 1000 / 1000 / 1000 ~= 160.04 GB :)
> > > >
> > > >Similar for 468872448.
> > > If it's decimal, what's that "1024" doing there and why the odd number
> > > "156290816" for a "Kibibyte"? Surely they should ALL be powers of 10?
> > >
> > > Seems a tad inconsistent to me...
> > >
> > > Besides... 1024 is "decimal"... 2^10!!! :?
> >
> > because the sizes are measured in blocks originally, and a block is 1024
> > bytes, which is one KiB but 1.024 KB.
>
> Sectors are 512 bytes, and blocks (on hard disks) are typically
> 4096 bytes (but that's determined when you format the partition,
> and is determined at run-time).
But I believe the common filesystems use 1024-byte blocks anyway.
At least space measurements seem to be done in blocks.
lthough a few years ago I recall that both 512- and 1024 blocks were in
use -- very confusing.
-- hendrik
Reply to: