How to calculate partition Start End Sector?Disk problems prevent me from booting, or set the disk to...

Information to fellow intern about hiring?

"My colleague's body is amazing"

aging parents with no investments

Landing in very high winds

Is there a way to make member function NOT callable from constructor?

Typesetting a double Over Dot on top of a symbol

Map list to bin numbers

How to manage monthly salary

Lied on resume at previous job

Is every set a filtered colimit of finite sets?

Is ipsum/ipsa/ipse a third person pronoun, or can it serve other functions?

Could a US political party gain complete control over the government by removing checks & balances?

Symmetry in quantum mechanics

Why was the "bread communication" in the arena of Catching Fire left out in the movie?

I see my dog run

Domain expired, GoDaddy holds it and is asking more money

Ideas for 3rd eye abilities

How to make payment on the internet without leaving a money trail?

Is there a name of the flying bionic bird?

Re-submission of rejected manuscript without informing co-authors

If a centaur druid Wild Shapes into a Giant Elk, do their Charge features stack?

Shall I use personal or official e-mail account when registering to external websites for work purpose?

Is domain driven design an anti-SQL pattern?

What is the meaning of "of trouble" in the following sentence?



How to calculate partition Start End Sector?


Disk problems prevent me from booting, or set the disk to read-only. How do I fix the disk?How to format a 1GB USB stick to FAT32 with 512 bytes sector?Expanding root partition CentOS 6 With using fdiskHow to extend logical & extended partition with fdiskExtend partition using LVMHost unreachable after resizing partitionCorrupted ntfs volume mounting problemI have a dedicated with 2 SSDs, how to I group them to behave as 1?Wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sdXExternal HDD failure due to bad blocks






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







6















I am wondering what Start and End value to choose when partitioning my ext. SSD using fdisk.



fdisk suggests 2048-250069679, default 2048 but 250069679 cannot be divided by 512 nor by 2048. Wouldn't it be better to set the Start and End value to a number that can be divided by 512 or 2048 or 4096?



For example: Start 4096 and End 250068992




Command (m for help): p

Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300


Command (m for help): n
Partition type
p primary (0 primary, 0 extended, 4 free)
e extended (container for logical partitions)
Select (default p): p
Partition number (1-4, default 1):
First sector (2048-250069679, default 2048):
Last sector, +sectors or +size{K,M,G,T,P} (2048-250069679, default 250069679):

Created a new partition 1 of type 'Linux' and of size 119,2 GiB.


Command (m for help): p
Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300

Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/sda1 2048 250069679 250067632 119,2G 83 Linux

Command (m for help): i
Selected partition 1
Device: /dev/sda1
Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632
Cylinders: 15566
Size: 119,2G
Id: 83
Type: Linux
Start-C/H/S: 0/32/33
End-C/H/S: 206/29/63


mkfs.ext4 /dev/sda1
mke2fs 1.43.4 (31-Jan-2017)
Ein Dateisystems mit 31258454 (4k) Blöcken und 7815168 Inodes wird erzeugt.
UUID des Dateisystems: fdce9286-4545-447c-9cca-7d67f5bb9f43
Superblock-Sicherungskopien gespeichert in den Blöcken:
32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736, 1605632, 2654208,
4096000, 7962624, 11239424, 20480000, 23887872


fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300

Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/sda1 2048 250069679 250067632 119,2G 83 Linux


And how can it be that the Sectors number is lower than the End value?




Command (m for help): i
Selected partition 1
Device: /dev/sda1
Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632
Cylinders: 15566
Size: 119,2G
Id: 83
Type: Linux
Start-C/H/S: 0/32/33
End-C/H/S: 206/29/63










share|improve this question

























  • Sectors is End minus Start. Usually for alignment, only Start matters.

    – frostschutz
    2 days ago













  • have you considered using a higher level (therefore easier to use) tool, such as gparted?

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    2 days ago











  • @ctrl-alt-delor normaly i use gparted, but this time i have no gui installed.

    – AlexOnLinux
    2 days ago











  • Live OS (boot off of USB, use ssh -X and run it remotely, or parted.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    2 days ago











  • @ctrl-alt-delor first: it's a raspberry pi using raspbian lite without gui. second: whats the problem of understanding how to properly align third: did i use the tools fdisk and mkfs.ext4 incorrect?

    – AlexOnLinux
    yesterday


















6















I am wondering what Start and End value to choose when partitioning my ext. SSD using fdisk.



fdisk suggests 2048-250069679, default 2048 but 250069679 cannot be divided by 512 nor by 2048. Wouldn't it be better to set the Start and End value to a number that can be divided by 512 or 2048 or 4096?



For example: Start 4096 and End 250068992




Command (m for help): p

Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300


Command (m for help): n
Partition type
p primary (0 primary, 0 extended, 4 free)
e extended (container for logical partitions)
Select (default p): p
Partition number (1-4, default 1):
First sector (2048-250069679, default 2048):
Last sector, +sectors or +size{K,M,G,T,P} (2048-250069679, default 250069679):

Created a new partition 1 of type 'Linux' and of size 119,2 GiB.


Command (m for help): p
Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300

Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/sda1 2048 250069679 250067632 119,2G 83 Linux

Command (m for help): i
Selected partition 1
Device: /dev/sda1
Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632
Cylinders: 15566
Size: 119,2G
Id: 83
Type: Linux
Start-C/H/S: 0/32/33
End-C/H/S: 206/29/63


mkfs.ext4 /dev/sda1
mke2fs 1.43.4 (31-Jan-2017)
Ein Dateisystems mit 31258454 (4k) Blöcken und 7815168 Inodes wird erzeugt.
UUID des Dateisystems: fdce9286-4545-447c-9cca-7d67f5bb9f43
Superblock-Sicherungskopien gespeichert in den Blöcken:
32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736, 1605632, 2654208,
4096000, 7962624, 11239424, 20480000, 23887872


fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300

Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/sda1 2048 250069679 250067632 119,2G 83 Linux


And how can it be that the Sectors number is lower than the End value?




Command (m for help): i
Selected partition 1
Device: /dev/sda1
Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632
Cylinders: 15566
Size: 119,2G
Id: 83
Type: Linux
Start-C/H/S: 0/32/33
End-C/H/S: 206/29/63










share|improve this question

























  • Sectors is End minus Start. Usually for alignment, only Start matters.

    – frostschutz
    2 days ago













  • have you considered using a higher level (therefore easier to use) tool, such as gparted?

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    2 days ago











  • @ctrl-alt-delor normaly i use gparted, but this time i have no gui installed.

    – AlexOnLinux
    2 days ago











  • Live OS (boot off of USB, use ssh -X and run it remotely, or parted.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    2 days ago











  • @ctrl-alt-delor first: it's a raspberry pi using raspbian lite without gui. second: whats the problem of understanding how to properly align third: did i use the tools fdisk and mkfs.ext4 incorrect?

    – AlexOnLinux
    yesterday














6












6








6








I am wondering what Start and End value to choose when partitioning my ext. SSD using fdisk.



fdisk suggests 2048-250069679, default 2048 but 250069679 cannot be divided by 512 nor by 2048. Wouldn't it be better to set the Start and End value to a number that can be divided by 512 or 2048 or 4096?



For example: Start 4096 and End 250068992




Command (m for help): p

Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300


Command (m for help): n
Partition type
p primary (0 primary, 0 extended, 4 free)
e extended (container for logical partitions)
Select (default p): p
Partition number (1-4, default 1):
First sector (2048-250069679, default 2048):
Last sector, +sectors or +size{K,M,G,T,P} (2048-250069679, default 250069679):

Created a new partition 1 of type 'Linux' and of size 119,2 GiB.


Command (m for help): p
Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300

Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/sda1 2048 250069679 250067632 119,2G 83 Linux

Command (m for help): i
Selected partition 1
Device: /dev/sda1
Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632
Cylinders: 15566
Size: 119,2G
Id: 83
Type: Linux
Start-C/H/S: 0/32/33
End-C/H/S: 206/29/63


mkfs.ext4 /dev/sda1
mke2fs 1.43.4 (31-Jan-2017)
Ein Dateisystems mit 31258454 (4k) Blöcken und 7815168 Inodes wird erzeugt.
UUID des Dateisystems: fdce9286-4545-447c-9cca-7d67f5bb9f43
Superblock-Sicherungskopien gespeichert in den Blöcken:
32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736, 1605632, 2654208,
4096000, 7962624, 11239424, 20480000, 23887872


fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300

Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/sda1 2048 250069679 250067632 119,2G 83 Linux


And how can it be that the Sectors number is lower than the End value?




Command (m for help): i
Selected partition 1
Device: /dev/sda1
Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632
Cylinders: 15566
Size: 119,2G
Id: 83
Type: Linux
Start-C/H/S: 0/32/33
End-C/H/S: 206/29/63










share|improve this question
















I am wondering what Start and End value to choose when partitioning my ext. SSD using fdisk.



fdisk suggests 2048-250069679, default 2048 but 250069679 cannot be divided by 512 nor by 2048. Wouldn't it be better to set the Start and End value to a number that can be divided by 512 or 2048 or 4096?



For example: Start 4096 and End 250068992




Command (m for help): p

Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300


Command (m for help): n
Partition type
p primary (0 primary, 0 extended, 4 free)
e extended (container for logical partitions)
Select (default p): p
Partition number (1-4, default 1):
First sector (2048-250069679, default 2048):
Last sector, +sectors or +size{K,M,G,T,P} (2048-250069679, default 250069679):

Created a new partition 1 of type 'Linux' and of size 119,2 GiB.


Command (m for help): p
Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300

Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/sda1 2048 250069679 250067632 119,2G 83 Linux

Command (m for help): i
Selected partition 1
Device: /dev/sda1
Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632
Cylinders: 15566
Size: 119,2G
Id: 83
Type: Linux
Start-C/H/S: 0/32/33
End-C/H/S: 206/29/63


mkfs.ext4 /dev/sda1
mke2fs 1.43.4 (31-Jan-2017)
Ein Dateisystems mit 31258454 (4k) Blöcken und 7815168 Inodes wird erzeugt.
UUID des Dateisystems: fdce9286-4545-447c-9cca-7d67f5bb9f43
Superblock-Sicherungskopien gespeichert in den Blöcken:
32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736, 1605632, 2654208,
4096000, 7962624, 11239424, 20480000, 23887872


fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sda: 119,2 GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa4b57300

Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/sda1 2048 250069679 250067632 119,2G 83 Linux


And how can it be that the Sectors number is lower than the End value?




Command (m for help): i
Selected partition 1
Device: /dev/sda1
Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632
Cylinders: 15566
Size: 119,2G
Id: 83
Type: Linux
Start-C/H/S: 0/32/33
End-C/H/S: 206/29/63







hard-disk fdisk external-hdd mkfs






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday









ctrl-alt-delor

12.4k52661




12.4k52661










asked 2 days ago









AlexOnLinuxAlexOnLinux

1706




1706













  • Sectors is End minus Start. Usually for alignment, only Start matters.

    – frostschutz
    2 days ago













  • have you considered using a higher level (therefore easier to use) tool, such as gparted?

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    2 days ago











  • @ctrl-alt-delor normaly i use gparted, but this time i have no gui installed.

    – AlexOnLinux
    2 days ago











  • Live OS (boot off of USB, use ssh -X and run it remotely, or parted.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    2 days ago











  • @ctrl-alt-delor first: it's a raspberry pi using raspbian lite without gui. second: whats the problem of understanding how to properly align third: did i use the tools fdisk and mkfs.ext4 incorrect?

    – AlexOnLinux
    yesterday



















  • Sectors is End minus Start. Usually for alignment, only Start matters.

    – frostschutz
    2 days ago













  • have you considered using a higher level (therefore easier to use) tool, such as gparted?

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    2 days ago











  • @ctrl-alt-delor normaly i use gparted, but this time i have no gui installed.

    – AlexOnLinux
    2 days ago











  • Live OS (boot off of USB, use ssh -X and run it remotely, or parted.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    2 days ago











  • @ctrl-alt-delor first: it's a raspberry pi using raspbian lite without gui. second: whats the problem of understanding how to properly align third: did i use the tools fdisk and mkfs.ext4 incorrect?

    – AlexOnLinux
    yesterday

















Sectors is End minus Start. Usually for alignment, only Start matters.

– frostschutz
2 days ago







Sectors is End minus Start. Usually for alignment, only Start matters.

– frostschutz
2 days ago















have you considered using a higher level (therefore easier to use) tool, such as gparted?

– ctrl-alt-delor
2 days ago





have you considered using a higher level (therefore easier to use) tool, such as gparted?

– ctrl-alt-delor
2 days ago













@ctrl-alt-delor normaly i use gparted, but this time i have no gui installed.

– AlexOnLinux
2 days ago





@ctrl-alt-delor normaly i use gparted, but this time i have no gui installed.

– AlexOnLinux
2 days ago













Live OS (boot off of USB, use ssh -X and run it remotely, or parted.

– ctrl-alt-delor
2 days ago





Live OS (boot off of USB, use ssh -X and run it remotely, or parted.

– ctrl-alt-delor
2 days ago













@ctrl-alt-delor first: it's a raspberry pi using raspbian lite without gui. second: whats the problem of understanding how to properly align third: did i use the tools fdisk and mkfs.ext4 incorrect?

– AlexOnLinux
yesterday





@ctrl-alt-delor first: it's a raspberry pi using raspbian lite without gui. second: whats the problem of understanding how to properly align third: did i use the tools fdisk and mkfs.ext4 incorrect?

– AlexOnLinux
yesterday










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5














Alignment doesn’t matter for the end sector. Sectors are numbered from 0; fdisk is suggesting the last sector on your disk (which has 250069680 sectors).



  Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632


is correct, 250069679 minus 2048 plus one is 250067632: the partition contains 250067632 sectors, starting at offset 2048.






share|improve this answer


























  • i am wondering why the end-value is not important. do you know why perhaps?

    – AlexOnLinux
    2 days ago











  • @AlexOnLinux your choices are either to use all the sectors available or not. If you want them all and the disk has a size which is not a multiple of 512/2048/4096 then the end will not be aligned.

    – icarus
    2 days ago











  • @icarus Having the Start and End aligned gives any performance advantages? Is it usefull to properly align the End-value when using multiple partitions?

    – AlexOnLinux
    yesterday











  • @AlexOnLinux all partitions should have their start aligned for performance (and wear-and-tear on SSDs, although that’s less of an issue than people make it out to be). If you create partitions with GPT and no space between them, the end of each partition will be aligned, apart from the last one in some cases (as in your situation).

    – Stephen Kitt
    yesterday











  • Miss alignment, of the start, will affect the whole partition, but of the end only affects the end and the next partition.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    yesterday












Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f510868%2fhow-to-calculate-partition-start-end-sector%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









5














Alignment doesn’t matter for the end sector. Sectors are numbered from 0; fdisk is suggesting the last sector on your disk (which has 250069680 sectors).



  Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632


is correct, 250069679 minus 2048 plus one is 250067632: the partition contains 250067632 sectors, starting at offset 2048.






share|improve this answer


























  • i am wondering why the end-value is not important. do you know why perhaps?

    – AlexOnLinux
    2 days ago











  • @AlexOnLinux your choices are either to use all the sectors available or not. If you want them all and the disk has a size which is not a multiple of 512/2048/4096 then the end will not be aligned.

    – icarus
    2 days ago











  • @icarus Having the Start and End aligned gives any performance advantages? Is it usefull to properly align the End-value when using multiple partitions?

    – AlexOnLinux
    yesterday











  • @AlexOnLinux all partitions should have their start aligned for performance (and wear-and-tear on SSDs, although that’s less of an issue than people make it out to be). If you create partitions with GPT and no space between them, the end of each partition will be aligned, apart from the last one in some cases (as in your situation).

    – Stephen Kitt
    yesterday











  • Miss alignment, of the start, will affect the whole partition, but of the end only affects the end and the next partition.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    yesterday
















5














Alignment doesn’t matter for the end sector. Sectors are numbered from 0; fdisk is suggesting the last sector on your disk (which has 250069680 sectors).



  Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632


is correct, 250069679 minus 2048 plus one is 250067632: the partition contains 250067632 sectors, starting at offset 2048.






share|improve this answer


























  • i am wondering why the end-value is not important. do you know why perhaps?

    – AlexOnLinux
    2 days ago











  • @AlexOnLinux your choices are either to use all the sectors available or not. If you want them all and the disk has a size which is not a multiple of 512/2048/4096 then the end will not be aligned.

    – icarus
    2 days ago











  • @icarus Having the Start and End aligned gives any performance advantages? Is it usefull to properly align the End-value when using multiple partitions?

    – AlexOnLinux
    yesterday











  • @AlexOnLinux all partitions should have their start aligned for performance (and wear-and-tear on SSDs, although that’s less of an issue than people make it out to be). If you create partitions with GPT and no space between them, the end of each partition will be aligned, apart from the last one in some cases (as in your situation).

    – Stephen Kitt
    yesterday











  • Miss alignment, of the start, will affect the whole partition, but of the end only affects the end and the next partition.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    yesterday














5












5








5







Alignment doesn’t matter for the end sector. Sectors are numbered from 0; fdisk is suggesting the last sector on your disk (which has 250069680 sectors).



  Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632


is correct, 250069679 minus 2048 plus one is 250067632: the partition contains 250067632 sectors, starting at offset 2048.






share|improve this answer















Alignment doesn’t matter for the end sector. Sectors are numbered from 0; fdisk is suggesting the last sector on your disk (which has 250069680 sectors).



  Start: 2048
End: 250069679
Sectors: 250067632


is correct, 250069679 minus 2048 plus one is 250067632: the partition contains 250067632 sectors, starting at offset 2048.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 days ago

























answered 2 days ago









Stephen KittStephen Kitt

180k25411491




180k25411491













  • i am wondering why the end-value is not important. do you know why perhaps?

    – AlexOnLinux
    2 days ago











  • @AlexOnLinux your choices are either to use all the sectors available or not. If you want them all and the disk has a size which is not a multiple of 512/2048/4096 then the end will not be aligned.

    – icarus
    2 days ago











  • @icarus Having the Start and End aligned gives any performance advantages? Is it usefull to properly align the End-value when using multiple partitions?

    – AlexOnLinux
    yesterday











  • @AlexOnLinux all partitions should have their start aligned for performance (and wear-and-tear on SSDs, although that’s less of an issue than people make it out to be). If you create partitions with GPT and no space between them, the end of each partition will be aligned, apart from the last one in some cases (as in your situation).

    – Stephen Kitt
    yesterday











  • Miss alignment, of the start, will affect the whole partition, but of the end only affects the end and the next partition.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    yesterday



















  • i am wondering why the end-value is not important. do you know why perhaps?

    – AlexOnLinux
    2 days ago











  • @AlexOnLinux your choices are either to use all the sectors available or not. If you want them all and the disk has a size which is not a multiple of 512/2048/4096 then the end will not be aligned.

    – icarus
    2 days ago











  • @icarus Having the Start and End aligned gives any performance advantages? Is it usefull to properly align the End-value when using multiple partitions?

    – AlexOnLinux
    yesterday











  • @AlexOnLinux all partitions should have their start aligned for performance (and wear-and-tear on SSDs, although that’s less of an issue than people make it out to be). If you create partitions with GPT and no space between them, the end of each partition will be aligned, apart from the last one in some cases (as in your situation).

    – Stephen Kitt
    yesterday











  • Miss alignment, of the start, will affect the whole partition, but of the end only affects the end and the next partition.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    yesterday

















i am wondering why the end-value is not important. do you know why perhaps?

– AlexOnLinux
2 days ago





i am wondering why the end-value is not important. do you know why perhaps?

– AlexOnLinux
2 days ago













@AlexOnLinux your choices are either to use all the sectors available or not. If you want them all and the disk has a size which is not a multiple of 512/2048/4096 then the end will not be aligned.

– icarus
2 days ago





@AlexOnLinux your choices are either to use all the sectors available or not. If you want them all and the disk has a size which is not a multiple of 512/2048/4096 then the end will not be aligned.

– icarus
2 days ago













@icarus Having the Start and End aligned gives any performance advantages? Is it usefull to properly align the End-value when using multiple partitions?

– AlexOnLinux
yesterday





@icarus Having the Start and End aligned gives any performance advantages? Is it usefull to properly align the End-value when using multiple partitions?

– AlexOnLinux
yesterday













@AlexOnLinux all partitions should have their start aligned for performance (and wear-and-tear on SSDs, although that’s less of an issue than people make it out to be). If you create partitions with GPT and no space between them, the end of each partition will be aligned, apart from the last one in some cases (as in your situation).

– Stephen Kitt
yesterday





@AlexOnLinux all partitions should have their start aligned for performance (and wear-and-tear on SSDs, although that’s less of an issue than people make it out to be). If you create partitions with GPT and no space between them, the end of each partition will be aligned, apart from the last one in some cases (as in your situation).

– Stephen Kitt
yesterday













Miss alignment, of the start, will affect the whole partition, but of the end only affects the end and the next partition.

– ctrl-alt-delor
yesterday





Miss alignment, of the start, will affect the whole partition, but of the end only affects the end and the next partition.

– ctrl-alt-delor
yesterday


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f510868%2fhow-to-calculate-partition-start-end-sector%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Why not use the yoke to control yaw, as well as pitch and roll? Announcing the arrival of...

Couldn't open a raw socket. Error: Permission denied (13) (nmap)Is it possible to run networking commands...

VNC viewer RFB protocol error: bad desktop size 0x0I Cannot Type the Key 'd' (lowercase) in VNC Viewer...