Why unallocated space on disk (Lucid)

I used manual partitioning from live cd when I installed Lucid last month, not having first prepared the partitions with gparted which is the better way. Just wondering why there are these unallocated spaces as shown below ...

 

I also did manual partitioning but face no such issues so its really strange.

 

Same on wife's Dell notebook where I also did manual partitioning using live cd.

 

To allow you to resize partitions in the future.
That's a buffer space for shrinking/enlarging and whatnot.
This lets you make changes without starting with the last partition.

P.S. Could be a rounding thingie also due to the way you set sizes.

P.S.S. You should probably have only one such allocation, so I guess one is an accidental rounding of sectors. Depends how you worked with the tool.

Mrk

 

Thanks Mrk, but why then does linuxforall not have a buffer space - or is it coincidence that his rounding off thingie just worked out hunky dory.

 

Run again - 3-4 times and see what gives.
Use different methods.
Mrk

 

But I don't want to reinstall or mess up the partitions as I have spent some time getting everything as it is now and all is working nicely. (Installed Lucid on release date)
In other words I'm not quite sure what you mean by running again.
Can I just leave as is ? Isn't it strange that my wife's Dell notebook also with the same partition layout has the same thing ?

 

Just resize the adjacent partition.
In any case you'll have no issues if you leave the unallocated space there.

 

I meant take a test machine - even virtual and then try using manual partitioning, guided, wizard, side-by-side, etc, see what gives, without alerting the existing one. Maybe you'll find the formula that led to that particular setup. No need to touch those two machines.

Mrk

 

Mrk, you are a hard taskmaster, I will try when time allows. Thanks.

Edit:- From my query on Ubuntu forums:-

 

The alignment issue is what came to my mind, Fedora 13 uses newer tool and its supposed to optimize partitions according to type of driver, ssd or regular.

 

hello ocky

i guss 1mb is not a big space

also do you see any performance gain


i also have many unallocated space before what is did is i keep it till next release at next release i format with gparted and use it now only have one at my fedora partition

 

Yes it is really small. Unable to discern performance gain but as far as I know the disk = 512 byte logical blocks so I assume it's just a realignment.

 

So does it mean that Gparted or Partition Magic are lacking a usefull new feature? They don,t seem to make such alignments, I guess.

 

Fedora uses newer version of gparted AFAIK.

 

You can use gparted/parted to align to sectors. You always could.
This is only relevant for certain WD modesl (ars and aes I think).
The rest still use 512b sectors rather than 4kb sectors.

Ocky, what are your hd models and sizes?

I noticed the 1mb at the end or beginning of extended partition, but not two such, so I guess you rounded off a bit, nothing important.

Mrk

 

I used parted magic 4.8, rather than Ubuntu,s partitioner and i have no such space.

 

The screenshot in my first post is for WDC WD740GD-00FLCO (74GB) Raptor
This screenshot is for (sdb) WDC WD1500HLFS-01G6UO (150GB) VelociRaptor (no unallocated space at end or beginning of extended partition). The VelociRaptor is a newer
hd, the Raptor is nearly 4 years old.
Note that on my wife's notebook with Hitachi hd, there are also the identical unallocated spaces as shown in my first screenshot.

View attachment 218759

 

Can you try with Fedora's installer to see what you get, don't commit, just check what arrangement it gives you.

 

Those disks still use the old 512b, so it's not the alignment thingie.
WD 4K sector disks are only for 500GB and higher sizes, btw.

I guess you rounded off when creating partitions. You used custom settings, how did you specific the sizes? In whole numbers? Fractional count? Did you divide by 1024 or such to get whole figures?

Mrk

 

Yes, I rounded off and whereas I usually multiply by 1024, I didn't do that this time. Thank you for the info re. the WD disks. I will leave everything as is and not resize.