RAID Array - Cluster size?
Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2002 4:56 pm
I've been reading that the cluster size can improve/decrease performance. Since I'm rebuilding my RAID array, I was curious what cluster size I should use? I'm using an HPT370 controller with two D740x (40gig) Maxtor drives, if it matters.
[edit]
<i>"While the "/Z" switch has become increasingly popular amongst those that like to tweak their systems, I do not recommend the use of this switch. In theory, it should allow you to create a large partition with small cluster sizes, or a small partition with large clusters. The problem is that this switch creates non-standard partitions that can cause problems with some software that isn't expecting them. In the example given above, the file allocation table would have twice as many entries as normal for a FAT32 partition. There have been problems reported with programs "breaking" when attempting to use partitions that have been modified using the "/Z" parameter to make small clusters, because the programs can't handle the increased numbers of clusters in the partition. If you really care about getting smaller cluster sizes that much, just break the disk into more partitions. Using "/Z" to increase the cluster size should work, but again, it's a minor performance tweak and should be approached with caution."</i>
This is what I did before because I read it was a good thing to do, I set my drives to /z:32 if I remember correctly. Should I just keep it default and not mess with it? And what about in my HPT370 bios? It asks what 'block size' I would like to use (which I'm assuming is the same as cluster size?) and my choises are 64,32,16,8 and 4.
[edi2]
I'm now reading at this website (http://www.viahardware.com/faq/ka7/faqdisks.html) that the recommended block size for an HPT370 controller is 16 and that you should format with /z:32--twice the block size for optimum performance (this is on a KA7-100 mobo, but the controller is the same as my Epox).
[edit]
<i>"While the "/Z" switch has become increasingly popular amongst those that like to tweak their systems, I do not recommend the use of this switch. In theory, it should allow you to create a large partition with small cluster sizes, or a small partition with large clusters. The problem is that this switch creates non-standard partitions that can cause problems with some software that isn't expecting them. In the example given above, the file allocation table would have twice as many entries as normal for a FAT32 partition. There have been problems reported with programs "breaking" when attempting to use partitions that have been modified using the "/Z" parameter to make small clusters, because the programs can't handle the increased numbers of clusters in the partition. If you really care about getting smaller cluster sizes that much, just break the disk into more partitions. Using "/Z" to increase the cluster size should work, but again, it's a minor performance tweak and should be approached with caution."</i>
This is what I did before because I read it was a good thing to do, I set my drives to /z:32 if I remember correctly. Should I just keep it default and not mess with it? And what about in my HPT370 bios? It asks what 'block size' I would like to use (which I'm assuming is the same as cluster size?) and my choises are 64,32,16,8 and 4.
[edi2]
I'm now reading at this website (http://www.viahardware.com/faq/ka7/faqdisks.html) that the recommended block size for an HPT370 controller is 16 and that you should format with /z:32--twice the block size for optimum performance (this is on a KA7-100 mobo, but the controller is the same as my Epox).
