»

[Franko]

Originally Posted by amigakit

I have just added a 2TB Seagate SATA drive to my A1200 with FastATA/Sata adapter, OS 3.9

The first problem I had was with OS 3.9 HDToolbox.

I recommend first installing the RDB with AmigaOS 3.9 BB2 HDToolbox. Once the RDB is written, do not add partitions yet as soon as you press the PARTITION button, HDToolbox attempts to automatically add hundreds of small partitions which eventually crashes the Amiga!

Go into HDInstTools, manually add a few parititions at the start of the hard disk, then save and reboot. Go back into OS 3.9 BB2 HDToolbox and resume adding partitions (no crashes this time)

I recommend using SFS1 v1.279 for the System partition (bootable) and SFS2 v1.279 with long filename support for all others. Keep the first bootable partition (System) under 2GB in size.

You should ensure before prepping the hard disk that you have a patched 64-bit scsi.device and 64-bit Filesystem to use on the hard disk.

Hope this helps!

The reason for the "hundreds of small partitions" is because you have set the FastATAdriver to split, set it to NOSPLIT and you'll eliminate this problem...

Also I wouldn't recommend making the WorkBench partition SFS (best to keep it as FFS) as if anything does go wrong there are not tools for SFS to repair things properly...

I use a 1GB FFS partition for WorkBench and the rest of my main HD is split into 26 FFS system partitions ranging from 1GB to 4GB with the remaining partitions using SFS/2 partitions...

My Main drive (500GB IDE) can use SPLIT & NOSPILT at the same time thanks to a version of the FastATAdriver installed, which I rewrote myself...
(not sure why Elbox never fixed this problem themselves...)

My slave drive (500GB IDE) is split into 2 250GB partitions as this is only used for storage and not booting

[xerces8]

Where does the 2 TB limit come from? trackdisk64 with 64 bit addressing should be able to handle more. Or SCSI direct. Just wondering....

[johnklos]

Originally Posted by xerces8

Where does the 2 TB limit come from? trackdisk64 with 64 bit addressing should be able to handle more. Or SCSI direct. Just wondering....

It comes from using a 32 bit value to count sectors (2^32 times 512 bytes per sector).

[freqmax]

Use a fileserver via network and be done with the problem

Btw, SCSI read can handle 64-bit sector addressing.

[xerces8]

Originally Posted by johnklos

It comes from using a 32 bit value to count sectors (2^32 times 512 bytes per sector).

By whom?
trackdisk64 does not count sectors.
RDB uses like 3x32 bits.
SCSI can handle loads of sectors, ATA also.
And SFS can also handle more.
So where does the limit come from?

[johnklos]

Originally Posted by freqmax

Btw, SCSI read can handle 64-bit sector addressing.

Well, yes and no. Unless the ROMs in the later Amiga 4000T and A4091 were explicitly updated, SCSI on the Amiga would mean the WDC 33C93 chip which came on the A590, A2091, and Amiga 3000. This chip didn't support 16 byte commands, so it didn't support READ 16 or WRITE 16.

Originally Posted by xerces8

By whom?
trackdisk64 does not count sectors.
RDB uses like 3x32 bits.
SCSI can handle loads of sectors, ATA also.
And SFS can also handle more.
So where does the limit come from?

The limitation comes from the fact that the size of the LBA (logical block addressing) fields supported by the most common SCSI chips in Amigas is 32 bits.

IDE is another issue. Since the Amiga doesn't have an IDE chip to speak of (all the work is done by the CPU), it's possible to support arbitrarily large IDE drives, but the ROMs definitely don't support booting anything beyond the first bit of a drive (how far? 2 gigs? 4 gigs? 8 gigs? 128 gigs?) While AmigaOS can't use space beyond 128 gigs on the IDE bus (I've tried), NetBSD has no limits:

wd0 at atabus0 drive 0: <ST32000542AS>
wd0: drive supports 16-sector PIO transfers, LBA48 addressing
wd0: 1863 GB, 3876021 cyl, 16 head, 63 sec, 512 bytes/sect x 3907029168 sectors
wd0: drive supports PIO mode 4, DMA mode 2, Ultra-DMA mode 6 (Ultra/133)

Get someone to update the IDE code, and you're all set!

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by Franko

Also I wouldn't recommend making the WorkBench partition SFS (best to keep it as FFS) as if anything does go wrong there are not tools for SFS to repair things properly...

That's big nonsense IMHO.

1. the system benefits most if the boot partition has the fastest file system

2. the system partition can be recreated at any time from scratch because everything on the system partition is also contained on installation floppy disks and CDs.

The partitions with your creative work like artwork, self-made music, videos, saved games, documents, source codes etc. are the important ones which need to be kept safe and backed up regularly. The system partition is the least important part of a hard drive.

3. the system partition does not change very much. You can make a backup once after installation and if the partition dies, you can restore that one old backup and have everything back quickly. Just make sure that you've got a boot flopppy with all software needed to access the backup and the HDD.

[xerces8]

Originally Posted by johnklos

The limitation comes from the fact that the size of the LBA (logical block addressing) fields supported by the most common SCSI chips in Amigas is 32 bits.

Originally Posted by Piru

Incorrect, it does not depend on the sector size. Amiga can only address 2TB with trackdisk64 and NSD.

These two contradict. (at least partly).

[johnklos]

Originally Posted by xerces8

These two contradict. (at least partly).

No, they don't contradict. They state different reasons for the same thing. I can't say that I know enough about trackdisk64 and NSD, but it's perfectly reasonable to think that they don't necessarily support more than 2^32 blocks. The 64 bitness is certainly a reference to complete drive size in bytes.

It's entirely possible that both reasons are valid and true.

[Selles]

Why do you guys need such large hard drives on an Amiga computer? Is it ego? The hard drives on my Amiga computers are 2 GB or less, and I have never filled one up. Now granted, most of my Amiga files and software are on CD-ROMs and ZIP-100s.

I do have to admit, my Workbench 3.9 systems do not get used as much as my Workbench 1.3 systems. I have found that the more you try to make an Amiga act like a modern PC, the less fun it is. 3 TB, lol. I am starting to get the feeling that many of you guys actually do not like the Amiga computer anymore, because you are trying to change it too much. My favorite Amiga models are the Amiga 1000, 500, and the 2000, because they are real Amiga computers. Starting with the Amiga 3000, Commodore starting changing the Amiga, for the worse. That was the beginning of Commodore's downfall and the death of the Amiga computer. The new machines were lower quality and suffered from many problems. Hell, the Amiga 4000 was not even finished yet and Commodore ordered its release. 3 TB , lmfao.

[runequester]

Originally Posted by Selles

Why do you guys need such large hard drives on an Amiga computer? Is it ego? The hard drives on my Amiga computers are 2 GB or less, and I have never filled one up. Now granted, most of my Amiga files and software are on CD-ROMs and ZIP-100s.

I do have to admit, my Workbench 3.9 systems do not get used as much as my Workbench 1.3 systems. I have found that the more you try to make an Amiga act like a modern PC, the less fun it is.

well, sometimes its fun just to see what the upper limits are.
I use a 4 gig drive (flash card) and I can't imagine actually filling the thing

[johnklos]

Originally Posted by Selles

Why do you guys need such large hard drives on an Amiga computer? Is it ego?

I can't speak for others, but I had a 2 TB drive in my Amiga 4000 because I use my Amiga to maintain backups of various sites, such as:

archive.info-mac.org
debian.lcs.mit.edu
ftp.apple.asimov.net
ftp.mayn.de
metalab.unc.edu
sunsite.unc.edu
www.aux-penelope.com

My A4000 is also an active Aminet mirror (us3.aminet.net).

Granted, my usage isn't typical, but it is interesting to learn the limits of older hardware as it helps inform the future. The fact that SCSI could support 2 TB drives back in the day when a large hard drive was 40 megabytes is pretty amazing.

There is such a concept as "enough". The 2 TB drive in my A4000 started showing issues after just a year of use, so I put it on the IDE bus and bought a hardware mirroring enclosure which has two 500 gig SATA laptop drives. With all of the archives in place, I'm using only 70% of the 500 gigs, so did I really need a 2 TB drive? No. Is it good to know that 2 TB drives will work? Certainly.

[LoadWB]

Originally Posted by Selles

Why do you guys need such large hard drives on an Amiga computer? Is it ego? The hard drives on my Amiga computers are 2 GB or less, and I have never filled one up. Now granted, most of my Amiga files and software are on CD-ROMs and ZIP-100s.

Availability.

[ChaosLord]

Originally Posted by Selles

Why do you guys need such large hard drives on an Amiga computer?

Data storage.

[Franko]

Originally Posted by Thomas

That's big nonsense IMHO.

1. the system benefits most if the boot partition has the fastest file system

2. the system partition can be recreated at any time from scratch because everything on the system partition is also contained on installation floppy disks and CDs.

The partitions with your creative work like artwork, self-made music, videos, saved games, documents, source codes etc. are the important ones which need to be kept safe and backed up regularly. The system partition is the least important part of a hard drive.

3. the system partition does not change very much. You can make a backup once after installation and if the partition dies, you can restore that one old backup and have everything back quickly. Just make sure that you've got a boot flopppy with all software needed to access the backup and the HDD.

Well your entitled to your opinion but in my case its totally wrong...

1. FFS system is actually faster than SFS on my system partition mainly due to the fact the FFS accesses the thousands of small icon .info files faster than SFS can...

2. As for the system partition being easy to re-create easily at any time, wrong again in my case. As I use the System Partition for all of my program/executable files as well as the system stuff. All other partitions are used for data and nothing more...

3. Wrong again... my system partition is constantly changing as I write more progs or install new utils...

SFS is quite simply the best alternative file system for the Amiga user who requires access to large HDs and single file sizes greater than 4GBs. It may not be the fastest filesystem around but for reliability and almost unlimited large storage, it can't be beat...

I can say this with complete confidence as I've spent decades testing and benchmarking all of my various Amigas to get the best possible speed out of them. I would go as far as to say there won't be many folk out there with an Amiga set up quite like mine as it's is very customised and contains a lot of software & patches I have written myself that no one else has as I never released them...


@ Selles

Odd to call it ego because some of us have a lot of data & stuff on our HDs, If you can get by on 2GB of storage then good for you...

My 2 500GB HDs are both over 90% full of both Amiga & Non Amiga data not to mention all my other HDs which are almost full as well...

It's nothing to do with ego it's quite simply down to 25 years of collecting and gathering all sorts of stuff which need somewhere to be stored and have easy access to...