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"