View Full Version : Nokia N900 32gb internal storage info
mechanicgjr8156
2009-11-11, 16:31
Can you download anything from the internet or website using the built in 32GB internal memory storage or this 32gb internal memory is for storage of songs and videos?
Its storage, so fill it with whatever takes your fancy. Anything specific you were thinking off?
quipper8
2009-11-11, 16:41
You have to forgive these poor souls who have been crippled by iphone thinking where you can't save a file from the internet or really use the storage for anything but songs and videos.
Yes, the storage on the n900 is totally user accessible as far as I know
Xisdibik
2009-11-11, 23:11
I certainly know what im putting in my storage, but I cant be writting it down on these forums ;)
just jokin
Rushmore
2009-11-11, 23:15
Apparently there is about 28 gigs available for media. There is no such thing as 32 gb in the first place since format parameters eat almost one gig. This is true for all cards and drives.
Slightly off topic.
The specs and reports always say "up to 16 GB of additional storage with an external microSD card".
Is 16GB a limit for microSD? It'd be much better to think of the expandibility increasing with changing technology, ie bigger and cheaper microSD cards.
Pulled straight from a wikipedia article on SDHC cards:
as of version 2.00 of the specification, the capacity of an SDHC card is limited to 32 GB. However, while not strictly adhering to that standard, it is in principle possible to create SDHC-like cards of up to 2048 GB capacity
The 'up to 2048 GB' format has been marketed as SDXC (Secure Digital eXtended Capacity) with the only cards available, again according to wikipedia, being in 32GB and 64GB capacities.
I can't see any reason why microSD cards wouldn't be able to be manufactured as SDXC variants.
Rushmore
2009-11-11, 23:54
Given the looooong time between 16gb and 32gb, my guess is we will using holographic or mirror based tech by then ;)
They still can not make 32gb chips in efficient yields to keep the cost affordable- high failure rate. This is the main reason for the delay.
It is, however, FAT formatted so it's not perfectly usable as a Linux /home directory or an rsync backup of your laptop.
Theres 2GB portion for applications as far as I know and the rest for media etc
Alex Atkin UK
2009-11-12, 01:35
It is, however, FAT formatted so it's not perfectly usable as a Linux /home directory or an rsync backup of your laptop.
But theoretically you can format it to ext2 if you want.
I personally am thinking I might delete the /opt partition and make /home the full size as I do not need mass storage device ability. Being able to properly share all that space between /opt and /home/User (whatever its called) is far more convenient. The ONLY reason they are separate partitions is to allow mass storage device ability, which you could still do for the microSD if you needed that ability.
OpenSSH will be one of the first things I install so that I can transfer data over more easily as I hate the messing around mounting/unmounting/permission denied issues you get with the mass storage controller method. That and how it cannot be accessed from the phone at the same time.
HangLoose
2009-11-12, 06:11
So, I bought a spare 16gb microSD card and I think that would be enough for me.
How could I increase the amount of space for /opt then? Lets say by 10gb?
So, I bought a spare 16gb microSD card and I think that would be enough for me.
How could I increase the amount of space for /opt then? Lets say by 10gb?
In theory you could create a RAID 0 array between the built in storage for /opt and the microSD card. To do so you would have to compile or use already compiled raid drivers as a module or built into the kernel. I am not sure if the default kernel supports RAID but I assume it is removed to reduce size. You would need to format the RAID partition destroying any data in /opt or on the SD card. I feel this is a bad idea. If you removed the SD card /opt would be unusable. Also the SD card and built in /opt storage are likely to read and write at different speeds.
A better solution might be to link the SD card to a folder under /opt for example make it /opt/sd and store some files in there.
My intention is to remove the /opt partition and add that space to the root partition. Then use a partition on a never to be removed SD card as /opt.
It will much easier to figure this out once we have phones to try it.
In theory you could create a RAID 0 array between the built in storage for /opt and the microSD card
....
I feel this is a bad idea. If you removed the SD card /opt would be unusable.
Also the SD card and built in /opt storage are likely to read and write at different speeds.
Yes, doesn't look like good solution.
A better solution might be to link the SD card to a folder under /opt for example make it /opt/sd and store some files in there.
My intention is to remove the /opt partition and add that space to the root partition. Then use a partition on a never to be removed SD card as /opt.
32GB internal eMMC is made of
~768MB of swap (to make total virtual memory 1GB)
2GB ext3 for /opt
rest is FAT32 for MyDocuments
/opt shoud stay as unix filesystem and cannot be removed, due to small 256MB root filesystem (ubifs in internal NAND) current official workaround is to put almost everything to /opt automatically. Almost all installable packages will use /opt for most of its stuff. That means if /opt is on removable card it really cannot be removed or system may not boot or interesting things will happen.
IMO if one needs bigger /opt then repartitioning internal eMMC card can be solution. Either make it significantly larger or remove FAT completely and leave only external card to be FAT for easy data exchange.
Or another solution is the old 'boot from mmc' one i.e. have one big partition on internal mmc or microsd, copy whole root fs to it and keep /opt there too (i.e. do not mount it anywhere). Personally this will be the first thing I'll do when I get the device - move whole root to internal eMMC, if it is slow (there are such reports that it might be, also 32GB is likely to be class 2 and quite slow to keep the price of device down) then move at least swap to microSD to put frequent writes away (eMMC may be fast for reads but poor for frequent writes), if it is still slow then move whole system to (class 6) microSD.
I still feel that the biggest downside of the N900 will be the microSD solution. I'll probably be doing my boot-from-card stuff and all the fancy things with my old N800 and the Pandora, and basically leave the N900 as-is, I suspect.
EDIT: Oh, and I think I might have to get one of those Scott E-vests to be able to actually carry all these gadgets and phones.
Rushmore
2009-11-12, 12:33
Yes, doesn't look like good solution.
32GB internal eMMC is made of
~768MB of swap (to make total virtual memory 1GB)
2GB ext3 for /opt
rest is FAT32 for MyDocuments
/opt shoud stay as unix filesystem and cannot be removed, due to small 256MB root filesystem (ubifs in internal NAND) current official workaround is to put almost everything to /opt automatically. Almost all installable packages will use /opt for most of its stuff. That means if /opt is on removable card it really cannot be removed or system may not boot or interesting things will happen.
IMO if one needs bigger /opt then repartitioning internal eMMC card can be solution. Either make it significantly larger or remove FAT completely and leave only external card to be FAT for easy data exchange.
Or another solution is the old 'boot from mmc' one i.e. have one big partition on internal mmc or microsd, copy whole root fs to it and keep /opt there too (i.e. do not mount it anywhere). Personally this will be the first thing I'll do when I get the device - move whole root to internal eMMC, if it is slow (there are such reports that it might be, also 32GB is likely to be class 2 and quite slow to keep the price of device down) then move at least swap to microSD to put frequent writes away (eMMC may be fast for reads but poor for frequent writes), if it is still slow then move whole system to (class 6) microSD.
I hope they did not use class 2 for two obvious reasons:
1. Greater data latency
2. Read write failure curve is shorter (does not last as long as class 6)
Given the reliance of the 32gb resources for apps, this would seem very foolish.
Hehe... I like the idea of a RAID using the eMMC & µSD, but I doubt that it would have much of a benefit, But I am glad the internal storage is big for a change, much like a real computer, coming from the E90, I constantly fill up the 128MB internal storage and if installing application/messages on card makes it useless for mass storage support over USB. I personally find the partition allocation for Linux on the N900 some what limited. Glad to know that we can change that.
I hope they did not use class 2
Well, strictly speaking, there is no class rating for MMC cards so by class 2 I meant the slowest and cheapest solution available. But anyway, when looking at Samsung eMMC (http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/products/fusionmemory/Products_MoviNAND.html) pages now, it looks like there is only one choice for 32GB. It is marked as 2bit MLC flash, 8x32gbit which does not say much about speed. Also I'm not sure this one is used it just seems most likely, at least N810 uses eMMC by Samsung.
I wonder if anyone with N900 could make some speed test via dd command.
I wonder if anyone with N900 could make some speed test via dd command.
it's "high speed" (whatever that means) :)
[ 6.618591] mmc1: new high speed MMC card at address 0001
[ 6.622467] mmcblk0: mmc1:0001 MMC32G 29.8 GiB
[ 6.622772] mmcblk0: p1 p2 p3
from the dmesg output (http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=31017) of a summit device.
maybe we're lucky and "high speed" means MMC Plus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MultiMediaCard#Table)? that's the only faster MMC standard i know of.
Could someone run
hdparm -t -T /dev/whatevertheinternalstorageis
and
hdparm -t -T /dev/thesdcard
for comparison?
Yes, it is high-speed card, the samsung page says it too, it is 8 bit, 52MHz, mmc 4.3 compliant eMMC, in theory this means 52MB/s but it is only the speed of the interface, not speed of NAND controller inside.
what is the problem? I put a vfat on a 8GB usbstick and put a 6GB matroshka movie file onto it... well preserving rights doesnt work but hell format the internal as ext3 and extend your windows to make use of it! I do have dual boot windows and linux and none of my partitions are fat, a transfer partition with music and movies is mounted with windows startup (just one to keep the overall journal mess to limits I can work with), as long as windows doesnt freeze I have no problem to recover the journal while booting into linux
I read somewhere that the n900 was already tested for 32GB cards and 64GB cards successfully but having class 2 cards doesnt work for me... 16GB class 6 will be my choice 14GB ext3 2GB vfat (just in case), the 29GB left on the device will be formated to ext3 every transfer larger than 2GB to a windows machine (which doesnt want to install ext3 programs) has to go wifi and I dont care...
Rushmore
2009-11-12, 16:03
Must be "class 6" level, since if lower, some of the current users would have caught this.
pagesix1536
2009-11-12, 16:21
Can apps be run off the 32GB or SD cards? Found out that my wife's new Moto Droid can only install apps to the 256 MB of internal storage. The 16GB card in the Droid is only for storing images, mp3's, video, etc..etc. Can't run apps from it that I'm aware. Just wondered if the N900 was the same?
Laughing Man
2009-11-12, 16:39
Can apps be run off the 32GB or SD cards? Found out that my wife's new Moto Droid can only install apps to the 256 MB of internal storage. The 16GB card in the Droid is only for storing images, mp3's, video, etc..etc. Can't run apps from it that I'm aware. Just wondered if the N900 was the same?
Officially? No
Unoffically? Yes with a bit of work
But just to clarify for any shell-shocked Android refugees: Maemo doesn't have the bizarrely cramped app space that Android seems to be unable to overcome in even rev. 2 iterations. You get over 1 GB of storage completely suitable for apps, and as mentioned, you can repartition in the unlikely event that is not enough.
Slightly off topic.
The specs and reports always say "up to 16 GB of additional storage with an external microSD card".
Is 16GB a limit for microSD? It'd be much better to think of the expandibility increasing with changing technology, ie bigger and cheaper microSD cards.
No, the problem is that there aren't larger cards at the moment. I think they are all SDXC cards, so they really shouldn't be limited at all (well, file system limits might happen).
Rushmore
2009-11-12, 17:54
Officially? No
Unoffically? Yes with a bit of work
LM,
Out of the box, the OS is allocating 2gb of the 32gb for applications if needed. Not sure if this is a predefined threshold or if the OS is already allocating 2gb.
We should have about 28gb of free space, with all things considered. I guess not long to find out.
TheThane
2009-12-12, 22:46
hdparm test
mmcblk0
Timing cached reads: 338mb in 2.01 seconds = 168.12 mb/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64mb in 3.05 seconds = 20.99 mb/sec
ram0
Timing cached reads: 306mb in 2.00 seconds = 152.95 mb/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 16mb in 0.39 seconds = 41.18 mb/sec
ubi0
Error
406NotAcceptable
2009-12-12, 22:56
But just to clarify for any shell-shocked Android refugees: Maemo doesn't have the bizarrely cramped app space that Android seems to be unable to overcome in even rev. 2 iterations. You get over 1 GB of storage completely suitable for apps, and as mentioned, you can repartition in the unlikely event that is not enough.
I still can't understand why the G1 (and Android in general) forces users to use the built-in memory, which in most cases is tiny. Just about every custom rom fixes this and lets you use the SD.
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.