On Jan 07, 2025, Michael Stone wrote: > On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 10:44:00AM -0500, Dan Purgert wrote: > > On Jan 07, 2025, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > > 8 TB is not that big. I have a external 18 TB drive. It is 18 TB in name > > > > only though! After fromating it with ext4 it only had 15TB of usuable > > > > space. > > > > > > 18TB "on paper" is usually 18 * 1000^4 bytes, so if you convert this > > > into "computer units" is ~16.37 * 1024^4 bytes. If you then make an > > > ext4 filesystem on it with the customary 5% reserved for root, that gets > > > you down to 15.5TB, to which you also have to remove the space used by > > > inodes, so yes, probably about 15TB and of course, once you start > > > putting actual files ion the drive, additional space will be used by > > > directories and metadata. > > > > Now now, let's not derail a rant with facts :) > > > > That being said, I thought the variance from TB -> TiB was 10%; or have > > I gotten it backwards? > > TB is about 10% larger. One of the worst crimes in computer history > was ever talking about storage in powers of 2, I really wish it would > just go away. It has properties that nobody wants and has been the > source of endless confusion, for really no benefits whatsoever.
Ah, found the mistake I made before. 1024^4 / 1000^4 (9.9% bigger) vs. 1000^4 / 1024^4 (9.09% smaller). -- |_|O|_| |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
