Back in the day I seem to remember that NetApp "right-sized" all of their disks. This was done to account for small differences in drive capacities from different drive manufacturers. For example, a 36GB drive was "right-sized" to 34.5GB or there about.

Is it possible that what we're seeing here is the effect of right-sizing the disks? Does NetApp still do this (Bueller....Bueller)?

Jeff Mery - MCSE, MCP
National Instruments

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Allow me to extol the virtues of the Net Fairy, and of all the fantastic
dorks that make the nice packets go from here to there. Amen."
TB - Penny Arcade
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Darren Dunham <ddunham@taos.com>
Sent by: owner-toasters@mathworks.com

02/24/2006 11:45 AM

To	toasters@mathworks.com
cc
Subject	Re: Aggregate size question

> we have the same drives as you have, those so called '144 GB' ones :-) When performing a sysconfig -r the filer showed me those 137 GB and i, young as i am, thought that the filer already made the conversion to binary for me. By rule of thumb this number seemed to be correct to me.
>
> Well with a drive capacity of 134 i really get close to what i am locking for!
>

Yep. Looks like 137 is not a pure "binary Gigabyte" unit for them, but
a hybrid of binary/decimal.

Reported size 144GB =>
1.44 * 10^11 bytes

In units of
10 ^ 9 ( 1 billion ) => 144
10^6 * 2^10 (1 million KiB) => 140.6
10^3 * 2^20 (1000 MiB) => 137.3
2^30 (1 GiB) => 134.1

--
Darren Dunham ddunham@taos.com
Senior Technical Consultant TAOS http://www.taos.com/
Got some Dr Pepper? San Francisco, CA bay area
< This line left intentionally blank to confuse you. >