Installing Win2K And Large SATA Drive Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter amuskratt
  • Start date Start date
A

amuskratt

Can I install Win2K with SP4 slipstreamed and large (>137GB) drive
support pre-enabled as it is with XP with SP2? I am under the
impression that I can only enable large drive support by manually
making a change to the registry. This would mean that I would need to
boot up Win2K at least during which time there would be no such
support.

This will be an issue to me because I plan to install Win2K on a drive
with existing data albeit on a different partition.

Another question I have is this question even relevant when it comes to
SATA drives?

It's my custom to only use a 32GB partition for the OS while dedicating
the rest of the drive to a second partition. I point "My Documents"
into this and am able to do a good job of keeping user data separate
from the OS and installed programs. Thus I can wipe clean the OS
partition to either do a clean reinstall or do a restoration from a
backup file such as Norton Ghost image file. The user data will still
be there and the only other time lost will be for reinstalling some
programs.

My fear is that this may not be possible with Win2K unless large drive
support can be pre-enabled before I boot it up for the first time.
Otherwise, any data in the second partition that is beyond 137GB may
become mutilated.

My current motherboard has a Silicon Image SATA controller that WinXP
sees as a SCSI controller. With this I've had no issues with drive size
and was able to dual-boot XP with Windows 98se with both having full
access to large SATA drives with no data corruption issues. I did have
to keep individual partitions under 137GB in size because of FAT32.

However, I've been given the impression that this situation is an
exception but not the rule. If Win2K does not see the SATA controller
as SCSI controller but as emulating a Parallel ATA controller instead,
the large drive support issue does come into play.

With Parallel-ATA becoming on the verge of being obsoleted with the
newer motherboards, I am considering going all-SATA for my next PC and
and am questioning whether I'll need XP for this. (I discarded Win98se
from my current setup when I upgraded my boot PATA drive to 180GB.)

Any advice will be appreciated and I thank you in advance.
 
A slipstreamed installation containing the relevent sp will see large
drives, assuming your mobo bios supports them.
You will need to use the F6 option early in the install process to install
sata/raid drivers from *floppy*, unless of course you have managed to
slipstream these drivers also.
Yes it is relevent to all drives, big Lba that is.
Assuming your mobo has sata and ide drives there may be specific bios
settings to use a sata drive as boot drive. Reading the mobo manual is the
only way to know.
You'd probably have to look hard to find a mobo without ata drives.
 
So I should be safe with installing a slipstreamed Win2K SP4 onto a
large hard drive with existing data partitions? Cool.

I've been checking out the reviews for the newer motherboards and am
reading that most of these will have only one IDE socket instead of
two. The manufacturers do appear to be phasing it out.
 
In message said:
So I should be safe with installing a slipstreamed Win2K SP4 onto a
large hard drive with existing data partitions? Cool.

I've been checking out the reviews for the newer motherboards and am
reading that most of these will have only one IDE socket instead of
two. The manufacturers do appear to be phasing it out.
Click to expand...

I am not so sure. SP4 by itself is NOT enough. You also need to apply
the registry fix at
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;305098
(The Maxtor website also has a .exe version of this fix to make it
easier for you at
http://www.maxtor.com/portal/site/Maxtor/menuitem.3c67e325e0a6b1f6294198b
091346068/?channelpath=%2Fen_us%2FSupport%2FSoftware+Downloads%2FView+By+
Category%2FDesktop+Storage%2FDiamondMax+Family%2FUtilities&downloadID=11
)

A few months ago, I installed Windows 2000 for a friend who already had
an existing HD larger than 128GB with data in a partition which extended
beyond the 128GB limit. I installed Win2000 from a CD (without SP4
slipstreamed) as a fresh install in a new partition. At one of the
restarts, it insisted on doing a chkdsk scan and reported a lot of
errors with index entries on the final partition. Without thinking, I
allowed it to correct them - BIG mistake. It caused data corruption,
and I had to use data recovery tools to recover all the data.

I don't know if "hiding" the partition (for example with Partition
Magic) would stop this problem - I somehow suspect not, as Win2000 seems
to "see" even hidden partitions, even if it doesn't assign them drive
letters.

Maybe just cancelling the chkdsk would solve the problem.
Unfortunately, I haven't had the time (or need) to try and find a
solution. All I can say is "take care and take back-ups!"

Regards
 
Can I install Win2K with SP4 slipstreamed and large (>137GB) drive
support pre-enabled as it is with XP with SP2? I am under the
impression that I can only enable large drive support by manually
making a change to the registry. This would mean that I would need to
boot up Win2K at least during which time there would be no such
support.
Click to expand...

You can as long as you don't have to, and do not, access past the
137GB point on the disk drive during Windows 2000 installation.
This will be an issue to me because I plan to install Win2K on a drive
with existing data albeit on a different partition.

Another question I have is this question even relevant when it comes to
SATA drives?

It's my custom to only use a 32GB partition for the OS while dedicating
the rest of the drive to a second partition. I point "My Documents"
into this and am able to do a good job of keeping user data separate
from the OS and installed programs. Thus I can wipe clean the OS
partition to either do a clean reinstall or do a restoration from a
backup file such as Norton Ghost image file. The user data will still
be there and the only other time lost will be for reinstalling some
programs.

My fear is that this may not be possible with Win2K unless large drive
support can be pre-enabled before I boot it up for the first time.
Otherwise, any data in the second partition that is beyond 137GB may
become mutilated.
Click to expand...

The key is to pay attention to the installation. If, when Windows
boots up, autochk tells you it wants to repair a partition that
crosses the 137GB boundary, abort chkdsk.
My current motherboard has a Silicon Image SATA controller that WinXP
sees as a SCSI controller. With this I've had no issues with drive size
and was able to dual-boot XP with Windows 98se with both having full
access to large SATA drives with no data corruption issues. I did have
to keep individual partitions under 137GB in size because of FAT32.
Click to expand...

If the SATA interface requires installing a driver during Windows 2000
setup, it most likely will implement 48-bit LBA.
 
Back
Top