[SOLVED] Size on my internal drive and external hard drive

[Light Hope]

Hello,

I'm new here and I was wondering if someone can be kind enough to help me work a small problem out.

I have an internal hard that's 29.1TB in capacity. It's been filled and there is 938GB remaining.

I also have my stuff backed up on 3 external hard drives (Seagate) making up the size overall size (6TB, 18TB and 16TB). The space remaining across the 3 drives is 933.8GB.

There is a discrepancy of 4.2GB. I'm not the one who likes wasting space because all these drives were expensive. I've checked internal and external drives for any duplicate files, I've run duplicate apps to check this and it came with nothing.

I checked if there were the same number of files on both the internal and external hard drives, there is, but I discovered much of this were tiny hidden files.

A friend of mine suggested, the external hard drives may have used up more space to store all my data because the way it writes data is different to an SSD. What do you guys think? Does this sound plausible? Or do you have any ideas how I can trace this menace of a file down?

Thank you for your time.

 

[USAFRet]

I have an internal hard that's 29.1TB in capacity.

No.
There are no 29.1TB drives. Yet.

You may have some device that does an internal RAID 0 between 2x 16TB drives.

So....give us some details on exactly what you have.

 

[Light Hope]

No.
There are no 29.1TB drives. Yet.

You may have some device that does an internal RAID 0 between 2x 16TB drives.

So....give us some details on exactly what you have.

No.
There are no 29.1TB drives. Yet.

You may have some device that does an internal RAID 0 between 2x 16TB drives.

So....give us some details on exactly what you have.

Hi,

I have four SSDs (Samsung) in RAID 0 configuration. Each drive is 8TB.

 

[USAFRet]

Hi,

I have four SSDs (Samsung) in RAID 0 configuration. Each drive is 8TB.

Right.

Now, give us some more info.

Size of the array.
32TB (4x8TB) == reported 29.1Tebibyte
What is the actual consumed space?


"6TB, 8TB and 16TB "
6+8+16=30TB == reported 27.2 1Tebibyte
How much space is consumed on each of those physical drives, individually?



If the number of files is the same, you are alomst certainly just looking at a difference in reporting units, or sector size.

 

[SkyNetRising]

I have four SSDs (Samsung) in RAID 0 configuration. Each drive is 8TB.

That's just absurd waste of money. One drive is like $750. LOL

 

[USAFRet]

I have four SSDs (Samsung) in RAID 0 configuration. Each drive is 8TB.

Tangential to any 'size' thing.....what is this RAID 0 used for?

 

[Light Hope]

Right.

Now, give us some more info.

Size of the array.
32TB (4x8TB) == reported 29.1Tebibyte
What is the actual consumed space?


"6TB, 8TB and 16TB "
6+8+16=30TB == reported 27.2 1Tebibyte
How much space is consumed on each of those physical drives, individually?



If the number of files is the same, you are alomst certainly just looking at a difference in reporting units, or sector size.

Tangential to any 'size' thing.....what is this RAID 0 used for?

Sorry, I made a slight mistake. The 16TB is 18TB.

The space on the four SSDs is 28.1TB.

The space on the 18TB is 16.3TB. The space on the 8TB is 6.79TB. The space on the 6TB is 5.04TB/

 

[Light Hope]

Here is a picture. https://ibb.co/WzkKmVX

 

[USAFRet]

Sorry, I made a slight mistake. The 16TB is 18TB.

The space on the four SSDs is 28.1TB.

The space on the 18TB is 16.3TB. The space on the 8TB is 6.79TB. The space on the 6TB is 5.04TB/

So...
28.1TB
vs
16.3+6.79+5.04 == 28.13

I'm not seeing an issue.

 

[USAFRet]

Also...a 32TB RAID 0 with only less than 1TB free space....you are killing the performance and lifespan of those 8TB SSDs.

 

[Light Hope]

So...
28.1TB
vs
16.3+6.79+5.04 == 28.13

I'm not seeing an issue.

If you look at the picture, I linked above. There is a small difference of 4.2GB. Is that expected or am I missing?

 

[Light Hope]

Also...a 32TB RAID 0 with only less than 1TB free space....you are killing the performance and lifespan of those 8TB SSDs.

No problem. I'll just replace when that happens. It's all good.

 

[USAFRet]

If you look at the picture, I linked above. There is a small difference of 4.2GB. Is that expected or am I missing?

Sector size difference, between the internal RAID thing and the externals.
Out of 32TB, 4.2GB difference is ~0.13%.

Since the number of files is the same...nothing is lost. Yet.

 

[fzabkar]

I would have expected that more space would have been occupied on the 32GB RAID. That's because the default NTFS cluster size is 4KB for capacities in the range of 2TB–16TB, and 8KB for capacities of 16TB–32TB.

 

[Light Hope]

I would have expected that more space would have been occupied on the 32GB RAID. That's because the default NTFS cluster size is 4KB for capacities in the range of 2TB–16TB, and 8KB for capacities of 16TB–32TB.

Thank you.

 

[Light Hope]

Sector size difference, between the internal RAID thing and the externals.
Out of 32TB, 4.2GB difference is ~0.13%.

Since the number of files is the same...nothing is lost. Yet.

Thank you for this explanation.

 

[DSzymborski]

Also...a 32TB RAID 0 with only less than 1TB free space....you are killing the performance and lifespan of those 8TB SSDs.

While what you say makes sense, if there was the slightly bit of sense involved, we wouldn't be talking about a 32 TB RAID 0, unless there was a very specific use case that is not in evidence here.