First part: the boot loader in the superblock/MBR examines the partition
table, loads the first sector from the bootable partition and transfer
control to that. That means you can put your partition at a different
location on your new drive.

Second part: yes and no. Physically the drive is supposed to be faster
closer to the spindle and it would be keen to selectively put stuff there.
It's not likely you'll do that in practice since there is no
correspondance between (logical/"physical") sector numbers and they're
real location on the disk. There is a strict formula to map a logical
sector number onto a physical sector number. It's just that the drive
presents itself as a certain geometry while keeping it's actual internals
hidden from the outside. Consider it a black box. It is possible to
determine some of the actual physical geometry through timing measurements
but you'll have to be a hard drive wizard to do that. Andre Hedrick and
Steve Gibson do that sort of stuff. Since you're not at that level, you
won't do that (at least this month; get crackin'!).

I just don't think it's a goal that's particularly attainable for most
people (even minor wizards).

Joshua Jore

___SIG___

On Thu, 24 May 2001, Peter Clark wrote:

> --- Joshua Jore <moomonk at rogue.electricgod.net> wrote:
> > Perhaps the old style io.sys located in sector zero of the partition
> > isn't
> > needed anymore. I seem to recall hearing something about that around
> > when
> > win98 came out. That perhaps the boot loader knows enough to find the
> > start of the boot data area, read the root directory and do a far
> > jump
> > over to the binary (as opposed to just loading a bit more and getting
> > the
> > start of io.sys)
>    Half-way random question based on that: is the "sector zero" limited
> only to the _partition_ or to the actual drive? I know you said
> partition above, but I just had a brain storm (must be the weather).
> First off, if sector zero refers only to the partition of the hard
> drive, then that means that theoretically, I can move Windows anywhere
> I want on the hard drive, so long as I keep everything in order
> (maybe). The next question, with a dual-boot computer where Linux is
> used 99.9% of the time, where is the best place to put Windows? At the
> beginning or end of a hard drive? (As though you were looking at, say,
> a disk partitioning line graph, with left being the beginning and right
> the end.)
>    The reasoning I follow is this. If we take the example of a record
> (as in LP, vinyl), a point in the outside moves faster relative to a
> point closer to the center. If hard drives were vinyl LPs, I would want
> to put the most speed-essential records (kernal, libraries, etc.)
> closer to the outside edge, yes? But do hard drives work this way? Or
> does the rotation slow as the drive head moves farther from the center?
>    If this hard drive physics is worth exploring, what on a hard drive
> corresponds to the outer edge of a record? Is it the first couple of
> sectors (assuming a single-partition drive) or the last? IOW, the left
> or right side of a partition bar graph? Or is the bar graph a
> convinient lie? Next, would it be advantagous to move certain files
> into those sectors, and, if so, which ones?
>    I suppose in these days of super-fast hard drives it really doesn't
> matter, but I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.
>    :Peter
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
> http://auctions.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> tclug-list mailing list
> tclug-list at mn-linux.org
> https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list
>