X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C77E15.20B470DE@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 14:46:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C77E15.20B470DE"
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: Min compact disk size
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 14:46:01 -0700
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E02215731@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Min compact disk size
Thread-Index: Acd+FR5n4Zkn9ARaQXa1gmupXsmjjg==
From: "Larry Scheer" <larry.scheer@onstor.com>
To: "Andy Sharp" <andy.sharp@onstor.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C77E15.20B470DE
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Looking at the disk format routines, that flash I have that is 488 disk
blocks is too small to be used in our systems now. However, it is a
flash that worked perfectly fine with the old flash_install_512.sh and
system copy init.  Since we hit this problem in house with an existing
flash in one of our systems isn't it highly probable we will see this
problem in the field?

Shouldn't CF_SIZE_MIN be relaxed to 488 from 490?

L.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C77E15.20B470DE
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.5.7652.24">
<TITLE>Min compact disk size</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->

<P ALIGN=3DLEFT><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">Looking at the disk format routines</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">,</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial"> that flash I have that is =
488</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"> <FONT =
SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">disk blocks</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial"> is too small to be used in our systems now. However, it =
is a flash that worked perfectly fine with the old flash_install_512.sh =
and</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"> <FONT =
SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">system copy init.</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us">&nbsp;<FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"> <FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Since we hit this problem =
in house with an existing flash in one of our systems</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"> <FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">isn&#8217;t</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"> <FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">it highly probable we will =
see this problem in the field?</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN></P>

<P ALIGN=3DLEFT><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">Shouldn</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">&#8217;</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">t</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"> <FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">CF_SIZE_MIN</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial"> be relaxed to 488 from 490?</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P ALIGN=3DLEFT><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">L.</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN></P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C77E15.20B470DE--
