Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (
More info?)
ignore everything he just said and read up on the link i gave before.
format the drive with the drive utilites available from the drive
manufacturers website, install windows and then immediately do the updates
for windows, after which you will still need to enable big lba
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;303013
"Al Dykes" <adykes@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cp2e16$cuv$1@panix5.panix.com...
> In article <G92td.2328$nE7.773@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com>,
> Wooducoodu <wooducoodu@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >www.48bitlba.com
> >
> >"ND" <nhat_dam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:1102356842.397357.173710@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I want to build a single HD system, where no partition on that HD is
> >> allow. What is the largest IDE HD capacity I can have? I have bought
> >> a 300GB Seagate over the weekend to build this system, but when
> >> installing the os I see the capacity only is 137GB or so. Therefore
> >> the question posted. I'm new at this thus can anyone help me.
> >> Thanks,
> >> ND
> >>
> >
> >
>
> The issue is how large the boot partition is. Other than that, XP
> supports partitions in the terrabyte range. (1000's of Gigabytes)
>
> I _think_ you can make a token partition, (a gigabyte ?) for
> boot.ini, ntldr, etc, and then install XP in the second partiton,
> which will appear as C: when you log in. All the essential files to
> boot XP will put in the little partiton by XP setup. I keep intending
> to try this. SOmeone please correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> Use NTFS. Depending on the way your application writes it's files NTFS
> file system compression may help you, big time. I once was running an
> allication that was receiving a GB/day of raw data and we needed to
> keep a month's data online. This was when a 4GB server disk was a big
> deal. As it happened , the data was all numeric ascii and compressed
> 20:1, so we used 50MB/day of real space. The applications that wrote
> and read that data actually ran significantly faster since since we
> were IO bound, not CPU bound, and a few computation cycles was cheaper
> than the physical disk transfer.
>
> You can put a second disk in the machine and put the swap file and the
> tmp folders on it. to make the best of your C partition. A second
> copy of XP could live there, too.
>
> I believe Western Digital has a 400GB disk. It's a bit slow (5400rpm)
> so putting swap on a second, fast, disk would be indicated it you do
> any swapping, and maybe offload some application IO.
>
> If you do RAID0 you can make a C drive that's the sum of the two disks
> you're using. So I can see a C drive of almost 800GB, even if the
> machine could only boot a 137GB partition.
>
> Putting the system and a huge amount of data in the C drive is sort is
> a PITA for backup and recovery from OS screwups (like applying SP2).
> Consider installing a second, minimum, copy of XP for recovery if the
> real XP gets screwed. Plan in 6GB for that. This could be installed
> on a second spindle. The boot.ini file in the first partition on the
> first disk has an entry for all the instances of XP you've installed
> and points to the right device and folder when you pick one at boot
> time.
>
> When you boot an instance of XP, the partition that it lives in
> becomes the C drive.
>
>
>
> --
> a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
> ----
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram