My Windows 2000 Pro laptop has a c: partition and a separate D: partition.for data.

I've been searching for a reference on the best cluster size for a Win2K partition, but
can't find anything.

The C: partition is a 12G NTFS partition with a 512 byte cluster size. Would 2K be a
more desirable cluster size for faster performance?

Thanks!!!

Hello Tony,

Maybe this can help you:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/140365

Best regards

Meinolf Weber
Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
no rights.
** Please do NOT email, only reply to Newsgroups
** HELP us help YOU!!! http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm

> My Windows 2000 Pro laptop has a c: partition and a separate D:
> partition.for data.
>
> I've been searching for a reference on the best cluster size for a
> Win2K partition, but can't find anything.
>
> The C: partition is a 12G NTFS partition with a 512 byte cluster size.
> Would 2K be a more desirable cluster size for faster performance?
>
> Thanks!!!
>

Hello Tony,

Maybe this can help you:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/140365

Best regards

Meinolf Weber
Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
no rights.
** Please do NOT email, only reply to Newsgroups
** HELP us help YOU!!! http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm

> My Windows 2000 Pro laptop has a c: partition and a separate D:
> partition.for data.
>
> I've been searching for a reference on the best cluster size for a
> Win2K partition, but can't find anything.
>
> The C: partition is a 12G NTFS partition with a 512 byte cluster size.
> Would 2K be a more desirable cluster size for faster performance?
>
> Thanks!!!
>

Please use cross-posting instead of multi-posting. Answered in another
group, if you had cross-posted the answer given the other group(s) would
automatically get posted here at the same time.

The default and optimal cluster size is 4K. If you convert a FAT32
partition to NTFS and if the partition is not aligned to a 4K boundary
you will end up with 512 byte clusters. To avoid the problem you can
align the partition before doing the conversion.

John

Tony wrote:

> My Windows 2000 Pro laptop has a c: partition and a separate D: partition.for data.
>
> I've been searching for a reference on the best cluster size for a Win2K partition, but
> can't find anything.
>
> The C: partition is a 12G NTFS partition with a 512 byte cluster size. Would 2K be a
> more desirable cluster size for faster performance?
>
> Thanks!!!
>
>

"John John (MVP)" wrote...
> Please use cross-posting instead of multi-posting. Answered in another
> group, if you had cross-posted the answer given the other group(s) would
> automatically get posted here at the same time.

Not my usual habit. However, I noticed that microsoft.public.win2000.file_system only
had a total of 20 threads, so I was concerned that I had originally posted in a dying
newsgroup.


> The default and optimal cluster size is 4K. If you convert a FAT32
> partition to NTFS and if the partition is not aligned to a 4K boundary
> you will end up with 512 byte clusters. To avoid the problem you can
> align the partition before doing the conversion.

Hello Tony,

What kind of newsreader do you use? My one has listed starting from nov 2006
until today 531 items.

Best regards

Meinolf Weber
Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
no rights.
** Please do NOT email, only reply to Newsgroups
** HELP us help YOU!!! http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm

> "John John (MVP)" wrote...
>
>> Please use cross-posting instead of multi-posting. Answered in
>> another group, if you had cross-posted the answer given the other
>> group(s) would automatically get posted here at the same time.
>>
> Not my usual habit. However, I noticed that
> microsoft.public.win2000.file_system only had a total of 20 threads,
> so I was concerned that I had originally posted in a dying newsgroup.
>
>> The default and optimal cluster size is 4K. If you convert a FAT32
>> partition to NTFS and if the partition is not aligned to a 4K
>> boundary you will end up with 512 byte clusters. To avoid the
>> problem you can align the partition before doing the conversion.
>>

"Meinolf Weber" wrote...
> Hello Tony,
>
> What kind of newsreader do you use? My one has listed starting from nov 2006
> until today 531 items.

!!!!!

I'm using Outlook Express 6.





>
> Best regards
>
> Meinolf Weber
> Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
> no rights.
> ** Please do NOT email, only reply to Newsgroups
> ** HELP us help YOU!!! http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm
>
> > "John John (MVP)" wrote...
> >
> >> Please use cross-posting instead of multi-posting. Answered in
> >> another group, if you had cross-posted the answer given the other
> >> group(s) would automatically get posted here at the same time.
> >>
> > Not my usual habit. However, I noticed that
> > microsoft.public.win2000.file_system only had a total of 20 threads,
> > so I was concerned that I had originally posted in a dying newsgroup.
> >
> >> The default and optimal cluster size is 4K. If you convert a FAT32
> >> partition to NTFS and if the partition is not aligned to a 4K
> >> boundary you will end up with 512 byte clusters. To avoid the
> >> problem you can align the partition before doing the conversion.
> >>
>
>

You may want to uncheck the "Get Next xxx Headers" Seems this was the cause
of missing posts in outlook express (all version that I recall)


--

Regards,

Dave Patrick ....Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

"Tony" wrote:
> I'm using Outlook Express 6.