This may all be my opinion here but:
Why do this? Partitions on a RAID? What is the point? I am sure it's just putting undue stress on an already taxed file system. Do you need separate volumes on the RAID? Does that accomplish anything useful in your workflow?
If the point of it all is to do a faux "defragment" on the RAID, you're better off copying onto a separate disk, reformat the RAID, then copy back. Partitions don't help in that situation.
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 1:35 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
I have a 12TB Graid that was almost full. I have deleted a bunch of files to get it down to approx 900 GB used. I then went into disk utility to change the volume to add two more partitions with each partition 4TB size. The process has been running over an hour now on the file shrinking process. I'm assuming the files that were left on the original 12TB partition are now being moved to reside only in the first partition. This would account for the time it's taking and the disk access noise I'm hearing.Am I correct to assume that when I added the extra partitions because the existing files were all across the original single partition they are now being bounced to the first partition? If so is it correct that when partitioning an HFS+ drive with multiple partitions that they actually break out the partitions In a physical order and not just create a complex directory to create the new volumes?John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net
_._,_._,_
Groups.io Links:
You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#134779) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]
_._,_._,_
No comments:
Post a Comment