Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I think you may have more difficult problems. I think Apple will dread the day they starting using Fusion drives. It appears that there are problems with Fusion drives and APFS which is required for booting as of Mojave. It also looks like you are already in Catalina by the main folder structure and definitely using APFS. I would Google Fusion drives with Catalina and see the problem. I actually uncoupled them for a friend with a 2015 iMac i7 with the 3TB Fusion. At least the 120GB SSD is big enough for a boot drive. You have a 28GB SSD and over 30GB of boot disk. But you are not even close as you need to account for the macS scratch disk which is essential for swapping out RAM as you change apps. I haven't had the time to read the entire thing as I haven't had that problem. Apple has to fix this, or you need to go back to High Sierra where the boot drive can be the old HFS+ file system. If there's a suit, you may end up getting a 256GB SSD. This is the same old problem of Apple making the consumer buy its products with half the technology and twice the price. Now they have advanced the technology for their new file system, but alienated almost everyone with a fusion drive. That's how I see it anyway.
 
Now my question is - Shouldn't disk 0 and disk 1 be combined together since it's "(internal, physical)"? Not sure if I'm supposed to see disk 2 and disk 3.

Yes, disk0 and disk1 (more accurately, specific partitions of them) are combined to make the "synthesized" disk3. It looks right to me -- except I don't understand why disk3 is shown as 1.0 TB; I would have expected it to show 1.28 TB.

disk2, disk4, and disk5 are disk images so you can ignore them. (Note that the disk numbers can change after a reboot -- I would expect what's currently disk3 to show up as disk2 after a reboot with no disk images.)
 
except I don't understand why disk3 is shown as 1.0 TB; I would have expected it to show 1.28 TB.

I think you mean it should be 1.028 TB, which is rounded (or truncated?) to one decimal place as 1.0 TB.

I agree with your comments and it looks right to me as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brian33
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.