Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Scottsdale Arizona USA
    Posts
    61
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    4TB disk problem

    The disk management software, Win7 pro, Win7 homw, and Win8 home will not let me partition a 4 TB hard drive.
    Can I accomplish that?

  2. Get our unique weekly Newsletter with tips and techniques, how to's and critical updates on Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows XP, Firefox, Internet Explorer, Google, etc. Join our 480,000 subscribers!

    Excel 2013: The Missing Manual

    + Get this BONUS — free!

    Get the most of Excel! Learn about new features, basics of creating a new spreadsheet and using the infamous Ribbon in the first chapter of Excel 2013: The Missing Manual - Subscribe and download Chapter 1 for free!

  3. #2
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,626
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 231 Times in 219 Posts
    I think you need to make that disk a dynamic disk and use GPT before you can use it in Windows. You also need Win7 pro or enterprise.
    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-gb/libr.../gg463524.aspx

    cheers, Paul

  4. #3
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Slough, Berkshire UK
    Posts
    918
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 52 Times in 50 Posts
    You could partition it into two 2TB. Then windows should see both partitions.
    Clive

    All typing errors are my own work and subject to patents pending. Except errors by the spell checker. And that has its own patients.

  5. #4
    Super Moderator jwitalka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    4,763
    Thanks
    67
    Thanked 547 Times in 495 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by curiousclive View Post
    You could partition it into two 2TB. Then windows should see both partitions.
    I don't think that will work.

    See Windows’ Support for Disks with Capacity Greater than 2TB

    Jerry

  6. #5
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Slough, Berkshire UK
    Posts
    918
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 52 Times in 50 Posts

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by jwitalka View Post
    I don't think that will work.

    See Windows’ Support for Disks with Capacity Greater than 2TB

    Jerry
    Why do you think partitioning a 4TB drive into two 2TB drives won't work?
    Clive

    All typing errors are my own work and subject to patents pending. Except errors by the spell checker. And that has its own patients.

  7. #6
    Super Moderator jwitalka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    4,763
    Thanks
    67
    Thanked 547 Times in 495 Posts
    I don't believe you can partition a greater than 2tb disk unless you use GPT.

    Jerry

  8. #7
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Scottsdale Arizona USA
    Posts
    61
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    The dis manager did not recognize anything over 2 tb

  9. #8
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Scottsdale Arizona USA
    Posts
    61
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Thanks for the GPT tip, that worked. I went to help in disk manager and queried GPT. It talked me thru the command prompts to set up he 4tb with the disk volumes I want. Went smooth, and didn't take a lot of time. Thanks again.
    Gunter

  10. #9
    4 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire USA
    Posts
    424
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 36 Times in 33 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jwitalka View Post
    I don't believe you can partition a greater than 2tb disk unless you use GPT.
    While that's certainly generally correct, it may not be completely correct.

    1. The MBR 32-bit data fields actually can support disks up to nearly 4 TiB in size if you make sure that the last (primary) partition begins below the 2 TiB boundary, since the MBR includes only that last partition's start address and size, both of which can be expressed as 32-bit numbers of 512-byte sectors. This may work even if the last primary partition is in fact an 'extended' partition containing its own 'logical' partitions, since IIRC their 'extended partition boot records' specify start positions as offsets from the extended partition start rather than from the disk start. (Another special case is that MBR structures could support larger disks if their sectors were larger than 512 bytes in size without overflowing their 32-bit fields, but that might confuse a lot of software that isn't prepared for such usage.)

    2. This COULD be how Seagate manages to support disks over 2 TiB in size with MBR configurations (such that, e.g., XP systems can use their full capacity as long as it's divided up appropriately - see, e.g., http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX6CG...ature=youtu.be). However, my impression is that Seagate instead chooses to handle the space beyond 2 TiB as a separate logical disk with its own MBR, perhaps because this minimizes required modifications to the Windows drivers (it also could potentially be used to create as many additional logical disks as necessary to support sizes above 4 TiB).

    3. Seagate's special drivers for this purpose are part of its DiscWizard application, so may only be usable on a system which contains at least one Seagate drive.

    4. If I had such a configuration I'd be wary about using third-party disk-management software (e.g., partition managers) to operate on it lest they become destructively confused (the Seagate software MIGHT be sufficiently suave to make everything appear normal to them, but I'd want to do some thorough testing before counting on that).
    Last edited by - bill; 2013-05-02 at 02:12.

  11. #10
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Berwyn Heights, MD
    Posts
    66
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Agreed, 1024 or 2048 sectors would/should make it all available under Windows, but Windows software (drivers and hardware that fix the data read and write lengths per rev) may have some hiccups unlike Unix / OS2 operations. And the slack space might prove to be huge unless content would mostly be large file storage. I run large arrays but always partition using 512/2TiB since slack space is a huge consideration for me as I have millions of small files to deal with.

  12. #11
    4 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire USA
    Posts
    424
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 36 Times in 33 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by mpioso View Post
    1024 or 2048 sectors would/should make it all available under Windows, but Windows software (drivers and hardware that fix the data read and write lengths per rev) may have some hiccups unlike Unix / OS2 operations.
    Actually, NT and its descendents have supported larger sector sizes (at least up to 4KB) for data disks (at least in the SCSI driver stack and possibly in the ATA stack as well) since the mid-1990s, though whether third-party software (e.g., partition managers) and BIOSes (e.g., during boot) are prepared to deal with this may be an issue.

    And the slack space might prove to be huge unless content would mostly be large file storage. I run large arrays but always partition using 512/2TiB since slack space is a huge consideration for me as I have millions of small files to deal with.
    The NTFS file system places REALLY small files within the MFT record (similar to a Unix inode), so it's only file sizes between the max that can be included there and the normal cluster size (4KB) that are the most wasteful due to slack. NTFS normally specifies MFT record sizes as power-of-2 multiples of 512 bytes, but I don't know how it handles non-power-of-2 sector sizes (if it allows them at all) or whether it ever allows an MFT record to be smaller than one sector of the disk on which it resides.

    My vague recollection is that ReiserFS may deal better with reducing small-file slack waste than traditional file systems that don't allow multiple files to share space within a single disk sector, but unless individual disk updates are protected transactionally such that an update to one file cannot trash the content of another that happens to share space in the same disk write that can be dangerous.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to - bill For This Useful Post:

    Ben09880 (2013-05-12)

  14. #12
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    67
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Why can I only use half of my huge 4TB external Seagate hard disk drive with Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7 and 8? -

    http://www.pcbuyerbeware.co.uk/HDDProblems.htm#gpt

    Can an ultra-large-capacity 3.0TB hard disk drive be used with Windows XP, Vista or Windows 7 & 8? -

    http://www.pcbuyerbeware.co.uk/Compu...windows-xp.htm

  15. #13
    4 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire USA
    Posts
    424
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 36 Times in 33 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Legge View Post
    Why can I only use half of my huge 4TB external Seagate hard disk drive with Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7 and 8? -

    http://www.pcbuyerbeware.co.uk/HDDProblems.htm#gpt

    Can an ultra-large-capacity 3.0TB hard disk drive be used with Windows XP, Vista or Windows 7 & 8? -

    http://www.pcbuyerbeware.co.uk/Compu...windows-xp.htm
    While the information in both the above links may be generally useful it contains enough minor errors that one should be careful not to take it as gospel.

  16. #14
    Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    67
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Hi Bill,

    How about telling us what these minor errors are so that this thread can discuss them?

  17. #15
    Super Moderator BATcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    A cultural area in SW England
    Posts
    2,832
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 110 Times in 104 Posts
    I am using a "3 TB" Samsung external hard disk (2.72 TiB) which had to be formatted as GPT not MBR in Disk Management (Windows 7 Pro). Absolutely no problems with it, other than the agonising slowness of the USB 2 interface (I don't have USB 3 on the PC).
    BATcher

    Dear Diary, today the Hundred Years War started ...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •