Slashdot Mirror


Changes in HDD Sector Usage After 30 Years

freitasm writes "A story on Geekzone tells us that IDEMA (Disk Drive, Equipment, and Materials Association) is planning to implement a new standard for HDD sector usage, replacing the old 512-byte sector with a new 4096-byte sector. The association says it will be more efficient. According to the article Windows Vista will ship with this support already."

7 of 360 comments (clear)

  1. Re:That's nice by jcr · · Score: 4, Informative

    So... If I write down a little 16-byte message to myself in Notepad containing a name and a phone number, it will take up 4096 bytes.

    On most systems in use today, it already does.

    Blame the file system, not the sector size on the media.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  2. No, that's not 'sector' by wesley96 · · Score: 4, Informative

    You're thinking of 'cluster'. This is tied to the file system that is actually used on the disk. Even with the current 512-byte sector, a normal NTFS partition of, say, 200GB, uses 4KB cluster and a single file takes up a minimum of 4KB already.

    --
    Serving time in Aristotelean prison for violating laws of physics
  3. Re:Ah, error correction. by Ark42 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hard drives do the same thing - for each 512 bytes of real data, they actually store near 600 bytes onto the disk with information such as ECC and sector remapping for bad sectors. There is also tiny "lead-in" and "lead-out" areas outside each sector which usually contain a simple pattern of bits to let the drive seek to the sector properly.
    Unlike CD-ROMs, I don't believe you can actually read the sector meta-data without some sort of drive-manufacturer-specific tricks.

  4. It's all about Format Efficiency by alanmeyer · · Score: 5, Informative

    HDD manufacturers are looking to increase the amount of data stored on each platter. With larger sector sizes, the HDD vendor can use more efficient codes. This means better format efficieny and more bytes to the end user. The primary argument being that many OSes already use 4K clusters.

    During the transition from 512-byte to 1K, and ultimately 4K sectors, HDDs will be able to emulate 512-byte modes to the host (i.e. making a 1K or 4K native drive 'look' like a standard 512-byte drive). If the OS is using 4K clusters, this will come with no performance decrease. For any application performing random single-block writes, the HDD will suffer 1 rev per write (for a read-modify-write operation), but that's really only a condition that would be found during a test.

  5. Re:Cluster size? by scdeimos · · Score: 5, Informative
    I thought cluster sizes were already 4KB for efficiency, and LBA for larger drive sizes.
    Cluster sizes are variable on most file systems. On our NTFS web servers we tend to have 1k clusters because it's more efficient to do it that way with lots of small files, but the default NTFS cluster size is 4k. LBA is just a different addressing scheme at the media level to make a volume appear to be a flat array of sectors (as opposed to the old CHS or Cylinder Head Sector scheme).
  6. Re: Apple in the forground again by n.wegner · · Score: 4, Informative

    You could have added MS with FAT32 and NTFS. The problem is we're not talking about filesystem cluster sizes, which are software-configurable, but the disks' actual sector size, which is hardware that HFS+ has no effect on.

  7. Re:Ah, error correction. by alexhs · · Score: 5, Informative

    Unlike CD-ROMs, I don't believe you can actually read the sector meta-data

    What are you calling meta-data ?
    CDs also have "merging bits", and what is read as a byte is in fact coded on-disk as 14 bits, and you can't read C2 errors either, that are beyond the 2352 bytes that really are all used as data on an audio CD, an audio sector being 1/75 of a second, 44100/75*2(channels)*2(bytes per sample) = 2352 bytes and it has correction codes in addition too. You can however read subchannels (96 bytes / sector)

    When dealing with such low-level technologies, reading bits on disk doesn't mean anything as there really are no bits on the disc, just pits and lands (CD) or magnetic particles (HD) causing little electric variations on a sensor, then no variation is interpreted as 0 and a variation is interpreted as a 1, and you need variations even when writing only 0's as a reference clock.

    without some sort of drive-manufacturer-specific tricks.

    Now of course, as you cannot change HD platters within different drive with different heads like you can do with a CD, each manufacturer can (and will !) encode differently. It has been reported that hard disks with the same reference wouldn't "interoperate" exchanging the controller part because of differing firmware versions, while the format is standardized for CDs or DVDs.

    they actually store near 600 bytes

    (that would be 4800 bits) In that light, they're not storing bytes, just magnetizing particles. Bytes are quite high-level. There are probably more than a ten thousands magnetic variations for a 512 byte sector. What you call bytes is already what you can read :) But there is more "meta-data" than that.

    Here's an interesting read quickly found on Google just for you :)

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.