|
From: Szakacsits S. <sz...@si...> - 2004-05-06 10:30:38
|
On Thu, 6 May 2004, Anton Altaparmakov wrote: > On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 00:55, Dave Pacheco wrote: > > I am using ntfsresize through qtparted[1] using the latest > > SystemRescueCD (www.sysreccd.org), which claims to have ntfsprogs 1.9.0. > > I'm trying to use it on a drive that has only 1 partition, which is > > NTFS, and approximately 37GB in size. Approx. 17GB are being used. > > > > When trying to resize, it was first reported that I could only free up > > about 1-2 MB. But clearly, there should be at least several GB of free > > space available. If I read the documentation correctly, this version of > > ntfsresize should be able to shrink the filesystem, even without > > defragmenting first. However, just to check, I tried defragmenting the > > drive with the Windows XP defragger. Ntfsresize was then able to free up > > 90MB. This is still not nearly enough for my purposes (installing a > > Debian system). > > > > Is this a known issue? Is there any known workaround? Or am I doing > > something completely wrong...? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in > > advance. > > Yes, I am not sure whether it is a bug or a feature (never got round to > asking Szaka who wrote ntfsresize). I can think of only one of the (user friendly way) documented limitations, MFT with attribute list attribute. > Basically you can ignore what ntfsresize reports and just try to > shrink to a lower size. You can ignore but it's pointless becuase it shouldn't ever try to shrink below the reported limit. It is always calculated and enforced, both at --info and --size time. > If you are using ~17GB you should be able to > resize down to ~18GB at least I would think. Just try it with the > --no-action switch and if it succeeds do it again without the > --no-action. Basically the --info option lies to you so you shouldn't > rely on its output. (It doesn't take into consideration the fact that > ntfsresize can move data around.) The --info option takes relocation into consideration but it's indeed an estimate. However it's the most optimal estimate. So under that value ntfsresize can never shrink. Szaka |
