🚀 go-pugleaf

In message <43a7vt$aat@News1.mcs.net> - itsinc@mcs.com writes:
:>
:>	I found this quote in OS/2's README file today, and I need to know
:>if it's right.  I was 99% sure HPFS could support larger drives.
:>
:>	If this is true, can HPFS386 (from LAN Server) handle larger drives?
:>
:>Steve
:>
:>

Steve, here is a quote from the Red Book on volume sizes:

 "
 The maximum size for a disk volume under OS/2 Version 2.0 is 512GB using HPFS and 2GB using the FAT file 
 system, with the following conditions: 

  1. OS/2 V2.0 requires that the bootable partition be within the 1023rd cylinder of the disk 

     When a machine's BIOS reports on the characteristics of a disk, it returns three values; it determines the number 
     of sectors per head, the number of heads per cylinder, and the number of cylinders. The IBM BIOS sets the disk 
     geometry such that one cylinder equals one megabyte of disk storage.  For IBM disk drives, 1023 cylinders 
     corresponds to one gigabyte. Other manufacturers may use different sector and head values causing the 1023 
     cylinder limit to be greater than or less than one gigabyte. 

  2. A FAT file system volume must not exceed the 1023rd cylinder of the disk drive. 

     It may also not exceed 2GB even if, due to the manufacturer's disk geometry, the 1023rd cylinder is beyond 2GB. 
 
 Imagine a 10GB disk where the geometry of the disk has sector/head/cylinder values such that the 1023rd cylinder 
 corresponds to 7.4GB, as is the case with some OEM SCSI disks.  Using the FAT file system, the way to configure 
 the volumes to maximize their size would be to have three volumes of 2GB and one volume of 1.4GB.  In this case 
 the 2.6GB of free space (beyond the 1023rd cylinder) would be unusable by OS/2 using the FAT file system.  These 
 volumes may exist in primary partitions or an extended partition, or both.  In an extended partition, the volume would 
 occupy one or more of the logical partitions defined in the extended partition. 

 Although an HPFS volume can take up the entire disk, for performance reasons the practical limit is much less than 
 512GB. 
"

		I hope this answers your question,

			David


____________________________________________________________________________
David J. Boniuk * Team OS/2 * E-Mail: dboniuk@bga.com * Austin, Texas, USA
My opinions are definitely my own, my knowledge belongs to many,
my abuse belongs to few, my ignorance is none of your affair!
May the wind be at your back...
"This Post is not to be reproduced in any newspaper, video clip,
or any other journalistic media."