Digital Audio 128GB HD Limitation ConundrumNot entirely ready here to
throw the baby out with the bathwater, with thanks to mopar300m and his comments & questions about
“What happens to certain partitions available under OS 9 when I boot into OS X just disappearing on my Digital Audio?”. He also mentioned the fact that anything above and beyond 128 GB (on any partition / master or slave drive) simply “vaporized” and went un-seen and not mounted when booting into any version of OS X. (Similar experience here with the G3 B&W / with Tiger, Panther and Jaguar.)
Ding-ding-ding!
Or perhaps, Bong!
Thanks to many others that may have already realized some of the inherent folly here
and for simply not mentioning the proverbial “fly in the ointment / sand in the vaseline”.
“AND YES, the DIGITAL AUDIO 533 MHz broke the 128 GB barrier
long before the Quicksilver model 2002 Rev. B boards.” - Big Dumb Guy (Me)
Well yes, no - and maybe.Well… maybe not really.
Seems that as long as you format and partition larger hard drives (above 128 GB) with
Drive Setup 2.1 under OS 9… you CAN have oodles of partitions and usable space above and beyond 128 GB - or just one big honking space
under OS 9. Now here’s the catch / caveat / heartbreaker. (You reading along here IIO?)
Just as soon as any version of OS X rears its’ head into the mix, installed on any of the primary (master) hard drive’s partition(s) - or on the secondary (slave) drive AND BOOTED… well then, ANY partition on either drive above the 128 GB limit… POOF! becomes invisible and does not mount under OS X. Nice, ehh? G-O-N-E.
*You may notice that none of the examples in the above, previously posted “confirmation” post ran or used any example or result from a boot of OS X? Well, that wasn’t intentionally omitted… but testing went on here for FOUR solid days (at least) and between mopar300m, DieHard and myself… AND for even a longer period of time (since the beginning of this month). Borgmac just volunteered yesterday to begin testing too.
Works GREAT under and with only OS 9. BUT OS X does not play well.
AND again, fine if you wish your Digital Audio to be OS 9 - ONLY.
Bring on those larger than 128 GB BIG DRIVES!
Throwing in the towel.(And maybe a little workaround.)
Yesterday, finally applied mopar300m’s observations and three-partitioned a 480 GB Crucial SSD with Drive Setup 2.1. (Attached to a Bribge EVB-002-03 adapter / master.) Assigned the first partition 41 GB, the 2nd partition 41 GB and left the 3rd partition with the remainder of 367 GB. (Which, as will later, painfully be shown here… OS X only recognized 47.92 GB.)
After partitioning… 40.04 + 40.04 + 47.92 = 128 (Per OS X Tiger)
OS 9 sees things just a bit differently. Here’s that 480 GB Crucial SSD.
![](http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6233.0;attach=9858;image)
All three partitions mounted and present. Redundant “Get Info” graphic below from OS 9:
![](http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6233.0;attach=9860;image)
This approach allowed OS X (Tiger) to acknowledge and mount that third partition AND
possibly allow
someone to test whether there’s actually 367 GB of
usable space.
OR ONLY… the 47.92 GB “Capacity” as noted below.
(Although it does also state 367 GB “Available”.)
![](http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6233.0;attach=9862;image)
Now, here’s an idea. Why not four-partition the drive with three equal partitions that
would total 128 GB - AND leave the balance beyond 128 GB to the remaining fourth
partition? OS 9 would see it and mount it and OS X simply would not. In this way,
that space would theoretically still be available to OS 9 for file writes, storage, etc.?
This may pertain to IIO’s old questions here:
http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,5955.msg44520.html#msg44520There’s always the concern about dragging / copying items from OS X back to OS 9
but far less concern about the opposite. AND OS X would be mounted and available
to “receive” from a proposed OS 9 fourth “Ghost Partition”… unseen by OS X?
Anyway, onward…OS 9’s Disk First Aid reported all as:
“appears to be OK”.
Which is different - compared to OS X’s DFA results.
(That graphic below this one.)
![](http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6233.0;attach=9864;image)
This graphic below, is from a Sunday test, and OS X’s First Aid
reported similar results as for the 367 GB partition referenced above.
![](http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6233.0;attach=9868;image)
That’s a 320 GB Western Digital PATA HD seen as 128 GB (not as 320 GB) under OS X Tiger, above.
The 173 GB partition on that HD only equaled 3 GB Capacity - while also reporting 173.1 GB Available?
If OS X cannot see or mount a proposed Fourth “Ghost Partition”…
then no
“Invalid number of allocation blocks” problem. Or
“Volume
needs repair / task reported failure on exit” for a herein proposed
3rd partition & any larger than (outside the 128 GB) fourth partition.
That’s 42.6 GB OS 9, 42.6 GB OS X, 42.6 GB empty space and
the remaining space beyond 128 GB for the “Ghost Partition”.
There was a problem with the above-configured Sunday dual-HD
setup. The partition entitled “Space” previously contained an OS 9
installation, installed from the same install disk as the WDC Mac
OS 9.2.2 partition. It would not boot from the WDC Mac OS 9.2.2
partition - no matter how approached. The machine would always
default boot to the OS 9 (which once occupied the “Space” partition).
No problems between WDC’s 9.2 and DieHard’s “prototype” 9.2.
Had no problems running OS 9 as a solo OS on any SSD in a DA
- but I always prefer having another OS (and HD?) present as well
in other machines here. So, while the 128 GB DA limitation might
not actually be broken here, this does offer an option. And with the
added benefits of cooler running, better energy efficiency and a
quieter operation... SSD.
Thus, an invitation to all Apple DA owners to test & challenge
these findings AND possibly to break that 128 GB barrier with
their Digital Audio machines.
Otherwise, go get yourself a “B” boarded Quicksilver.
OR have a bootable OS X install, on an external drive
& keep the Digital Audio as primarily a dedicated OS 9 machine?
![Wink ;)](http://macos9lives.com/smforum/Smileys/default/wink.gif)