Ken Smith wrote: > > Hi All, Slightly OT as this is on a Centos 6 system > Not at all OT. We started using parted when we started using 3TB drives a few years ago, since fdisk can't handle > 2TB. > I'm getting the fdisk message "partition does not start on a physical > sector boundary" on a 4096 sector disk. I understand why this has > happened. > > I just want to be sure of my parted syntax before I really mess things > up. (before anyone says it - I know - do a backup) > > parted says that the offending partition 5 begins at 512 byte sector no. > 462999615. Its the first partition in the extended partition that begins > at 462999552. > > If I just want to move the partition back to the nearest 4096 boundary, > which is 462999608, would the syntax be <snip> Wait, you're resizing a partition? I don't know if I'd want to do that with data there, unless you were *SURE* there was nothing in that area. For future reference, when I partition a disk, I start parted with -a opt, to make sure it knows in advance that I want optimal alignment, then, as an example, if I'm partitioning a large drive, I do this: mklabel gpt mkpart pri xfs 0.0GB 100% and it's aligned properly. I discovered some time back that using the x.0GB syntax got parted to align it correctly, and it doesn't complain. mark "parted: user surly"