> А всё же, чем GPT-то кривой? Хорошая система разметки, без всяких MBR'проблем. Велосипед, который ничем не лучше уже давно существовавшего LVM. Да вот кого-то прорвало:
---
What would be considered forward looking and potentially a superior solution to GPT? It's best if we look at some challenges and caveats of the MBR-style partition system:
* Larger block sizes improve performance and increase storage capacity. Does it support block sizes other than the old DOS-style 512-bytes?
* Sometimes partitions run out of space and we need more - it would be nice just to buy another disk and have more. Does it allow partitions to be combined seamlessly into logically contiguous blocks? On a live system in real time? If they aren't side-by-side? On different disks? On different machines?
* We like to get the most from our hardware and losing data sucks. Does it allow for partition striping to gain performance or mirroring to gain reliability?
* Working with live filesystems prevents certain important activities such as backups. Does it allow for instant copies of partitions on a live system to ease backups, imaging? Or for safe trials of such activities as filesystem performance tweaking or high-risk repair tools?
The answer to all of these problems being resolved by GPT is a resounding "NO". It was this comment which really got me thinking: doesn't LVM as implemented in Linux solve all of these problems?
As a matter of fact Linux LVM is the penultimate evolution of the whole "partitioning" solution. While LVM is currently limited to "only" 8 Exabytes (0.008 Zetabytes) this is a small price to pay for all that other functionality. Additionally, and unlike GPT, LVM standards are also developed in a revisable manner so it would be trivial to increase this in future revisions. Why was GPT even designed when a superior solution already existed? Why was the wheel reinvented...as a triangle?
--- http://insan-it.blogspot.com/2010/09/gpt-versus-lvm.html
И даже если подыграть MS -- реализация откровенно хромает по их любимому коньку обратной совместимости:
---
Unfortunately, GPT is not without its problems. These mainly relate to compatibility. Older OSes have no or limited GPT support. For instance, Windows only supports GPT at all on Windows Server 2003, the 64-bit (but not the 32-bit) version of Windows XP, Windows Vista, and later. Through Windows 7, booting from a GPT disk is impossible unless the system uses the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) rather than a legacy BIOS. (Most computers through 2010 still used a legacy BIOS, although by mid-2011 UEFI-based PCs started becoming common in stores.) [...]
[...] Some tools take advantage of this feature to create a hybrid MBR configuration, in which some partitions are accessible via both GPT and MBR definitions. Although this is non-standard, awkward, delicate, and downright dangerous, it can help make the transition [...]
--- http://www.rodsbooks.com/gdisk/whatsgpt.html
