[Info-vax] what is a good value for /CLUSTER_SIZE? (INITIALIZE and qualifiers)

[Hein RMS van den Heuvel]

On Feb 6, 2:17 am, hel... at astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---
undress to reply) wrote:
> In article

> With DDS, presumably if I initialise a new, larger disk to add to the
> shadow set, its values of /HEADERS and /CLUSTER_SIZE won't be
> overwritten by the shadow copy.  Or will they?

Shadowing works at the LBN level and is blissfully unaware of
clustersize, storage bitmaps, indexf.sys and so on.

> becomes difficult to use DDS and DVE to grow a shadow set to a larger
> size with sensible values for the cluster size.

Cluster_size is not really device size dependend, more file size.
But on a large disk the tendency is too be willing to waste more and
pick larger to ease the system
If you know you are going to grow, then you should design for the
final size.


> > and your are fine pre-allocating 450,000 headers (1/4 GB) on a 9GB
> > drive. Fine by me.
>
> Right; that's not too much, especially when the consequences of having
> it too low are bad.

The consequence of /MAX_FILES too low are nasty: hard wall. That param
is next to free: 1 bit per file.
/HEADER is just a pre-allocation and with the current INDEXF.SYS
growth algorithm less, or no, issue.

> Presumably Oracle Classic and not Oracle Rdb?!

Yes. The Oracle classic build environment is nasty, unixy, with many
many files and links.

Hein