@broadblues

Quote:

broadblues wrote: I wonder what else I'll find if I actually read the manual!

You can learn more about Amiga filesystems by reading the Filesystem Wars in CSAA from a few years back (where SG argues Amiga filesystems are superior to everything on the planet) than you can from any manual.

_________________
"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." - Oscar Wilde

@Mopemen

Just did a test here with SFS 1.268 and moved 990meg in 132 seconds from DH1 to DH4

is that good speed or still slow ?

@broadblues

Quote:

I wonder what else I'll find if I actually read the manual!

Reading the manual? Haven't you got something more pressing to do? Tsk, tsk, tsk, reading a manual. It's probably the last thing I would do!

OldFart

_________________
Life is a waste of time.
Time is a waste of life.
Get wasted all the time
and you'll have the time of your life!

@Mopemen

Here's my partition table:

Unit         Size      Used        Free Full Errors Status     Name                File System
CD0:         257M   132.095           0 100%      0 Read Only  ADCD_2.1
DH0:         255M    82.319     179.345  31%      0 Read Only  OS_4.0 r2            FFS
DH1:         255M    82.996     178.668  32%      0 Read Only  OS_4.0 r3            FFS
DH2:         255M    93.128     168.536  36%      0 Read Only  OS_4.0 r4            FFS
DH3:         255M   182.500      79.164  70%      0 Read/Write ExtendedWorkBench    FFS
DH4:       2.047M   538.200     510.136  51%      0 Read/Write Applicaties          FFS
DH5:       2.047M   163.570     884.766  16%      0 Read/Write Projecten            FFS
DH6:       3.071M   736.017     836.607  47%      0 Read/Write Games                FFS
DH7:         100M    91.581     113.283  45%      0 Read/Write WebServer            SFS
DH8:       6.000M 2.552.772   3.591.260  42%      0 Read/Write Extracts             FFS
DH9:       4.000M 2.306.182   1.789.850  56%      0 Read/Write Archives             FFS
DH10:      4.000M   328.595   3.767.437   8%      0 Read/Write UAE                  FFS
DH11:      1.023M    91.813   2.004.379   4%      0 Read/Write OldWebServer_2       SFS
DH13:        127M   247.994      13.702  95%      0 Read Only  OS_4.0 Final         SFS
ENV:         110K       110           0 100%      0 Read/Write Env
ICD0:      No disk present 
RAM:         145K       145           0 100%      0 Read/Write RAM Disk
TEXTCLIP:    116M        69 122.388.480   0%      0 Read/Write TextClip
ZIP3-2-64: No disk present 

Last edited by OldFart on 20-Apr-2007 at 11:57 AM.
Last edited by OldFart on 20-Apr-2007 at 11:56 AM.
Last edited by OldFart on 20-Apr-2007 at 11:54 AM.
Last edited by OldFart on 20-Apr-2007 at 11:53 AM.

_________________
Life is a waste of time.
Time is a waste of life.
Get wasted all the time
and you'll have the time of your life!

@Micam

Quote:

Can someony please tell my the ups and downs with SFS?

Contra: No recovery tool for SFS
Pro: Damn fast, rock stable.

During betatesting OS4 I had no data loss because of SFS at all. Since I discovered its speed I've totally dropped FFS from my HDD.

@sundown

I just looked and my SFS partitions have a block size of 1024, buffers = 80 and maxtransfer = 1FE00. Can the buffers and mactransfer be changed without wiping data on the partition? In particular, I think that increasing the buffers might increase the copy rate. You're system has a significntly faster copy rate and the filesystem settings seem to be the major difference (although I have an A1-XE and am using an sii 680 controller).

Hans

_________________
Join the Kea Campus - upgrade your skills; support my work; enjoy the Amiga corner.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - see more of my work

@OldFart

Wow, it's quite a list!

What do you use for a buffer size?

_________________
µA1c OS4.1 (with a dead powersupply (powersupplied))
A500

@Hans

I have my buffers set @ 8000

@poweramiga2002

thats a good amount for SFS.

_________________

@poweramiga2002
That's 7.5MB/second - not blazingly fast, but since you're actually doing data transfer between two partition on the same HD (?), it's really 15MB/second. Which is better - still not awesome, but possibly as much as you can realistically expect from your machine I guess.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

@OldFart
Looking at your 12 partitions I wondered if you'd ever heard of folders?

Backing-up that system must be a nightmare.... or perhaps you don't do backups?

My own partitioning goes something like this, and I consider that slightly over-the-top:
Workbench:
Data:
Programs:
Games:
Temp:
WorkbenchBackup:

All SFS of course, albiet under WinUAE (using real partitions, not them stupid file "partitions"). Only the first 4 need backing up.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

@Mopemen

Quote:

What do you use for a buffer size?

Not much really: my wife has cup B.

Furthermore FFS uses 2048 bytes per block and SFS the recommended 512 bytes.

OldFart

_________________
Life is a waste of time.
Time is a waste of life.
Get wasted all the time
and you'll have the time of your life!

@ChrisH

Quote:

Looking at your 12 partitions I wondered if you'd ever heard of folders?

Yeah, sure! I've even got some on the Windows box. But you mean drawers? Generically named 'directories'? How would you put 4 different boot partitions into one and still keep the separately bootable?
Btw, your question reminds me that some time ago I promised to describe me setup in more detail.

Quote:

Backing-up that system must be a nightmare....

Backing-up? What's that?

Quote:

... or perhaps you don't do backups?

Ah! You figured it out, I see.

For backing up I use ZIP100's, but unfortunately a SCSI-ZIP drive is currently only mounted as Read-Only. Don't know whether it's Stephane Guillard or somebody else addressing this prob, but until that time: sorry, no BU's today!

I really should consider backing up on a more frequent base than the once or twice that it is applied the previous 10 years on the A1200. The last time I did that was when I upgraded from OS3.5 to OS3.9.

OldFart

_________________
Life is a waste of time.
Time is a waste of life.
Get wasted all the time
and you'll have the time of your life!

The SFS partitions were:
Blocksize: 512
Buffers: 600
MaxTransfer: 1FE00
Mask: FFFFFFFE

I changed them to:
Blocksize: 512
Buffers: 10000
MaxTransfer: FFFFFFF
Mask: FFFFFFFE

Then I did the same test but the results are exactly the same.
I also tried 8000 buffers.

_________________
µA1c OS4.1 (with a dead powersupply (powersupplied))
A500

@Hans

Quote:

Can the buffers and mactransfer be changed without wiping data on the partition?

Yes. Media Toolbox will warn you when you try to save a modified config which
would destroy the contents of one or more partitions. You'll see such a warning
after you changed the blocksize for example.

IIRC the OS4 filesystems ignore MaxTransfer anyway, just because there exists
so much broken hardware which doesnt work with transfers >64K because it was
never tested outside Windows :)

@Samwel

Quote:

Samwel wrote: @Mopemen 128 seconds for two 300MB files???? Damn slow! A PC with Windows would probably do it in less than 15 seconds, not more than 20 seconds anyway.

(groan) A PC with Windows doesn't FFS. One of the things that make the FFS slow is that you can't both have crash-safe write operations and fast disk access. I think I've explained this a couple of times. The FFS reimplementation has to put up with a lot of baggage that came with the original data structures, and every single shortcoming follows from this history.

@Hans

>Can the buffers and maxtransfer be changed without wiping data on the partition?

Yes, no problem there but keep in mind that the buffers are for the dirs/files list caching, not data transfer.

Just don't alter the block size (though if you did, after rebooting or mounting the partition would show up as invalid and you could just go back and revert the block size without data loss).

_________________
AlexC's free OS4 software collection

AmigaOne XE/X1000/X5000/UAE-PPC OS4 laptop/X-10 Home Automation

@Mopemen

Quote:

The bigger the better? Or is a very big buffer not advisable?

Going from 100 to a 500 buffer size will show an increase in speed, increasing to 1000 will show very little gain. I see you have them set to 600, which is just right. Buffers use memory, blocksizeXbuffers, so if you have a lot of partitions, you could run low on memory for other apps. Everything's a trade off & the same situation applies to FFS as well.

_________________
Hate tends to make you look stupid...

@Hans

A block size of 512 vs 1024 will have the same speed, though 512 is recommended (SFS). Maxtransfer setting will not speed anything up as well. The buffer setting is way to low & will make a big difference in speed if you increase it to 500-1000. Just remember, the more buffers, the more free memory will be used. UDMA settings affect speed & a sii680 should be just as fast as a micro. I have both HD on the primary port as master & slave, my DVD burner is on the secondary port as master. If you only have 1 HD & 1 CDROM, it might help to have both set as masters, 1 on each port.

You can test speed vs buffers in a shell. Addbuffers DHx: will tell you how many buffers are set, +/-#buffers will add or subtract buffers to test copy speed. Once you find the magic number, then set the buffer size in Media ToolBox for all partitions.

_________________
Hate tends to make you look stupid...

@OldFart who said Quote:

How would you put 4 different boot partitions into one and still keep the separately bootable?

I wasn't suggesting that, although it's quite possible - I already do that for OS3.1-OS3.9 thanks to TrueMultiAssign & a *lot* of hacking... (I did once describe my system on these forums, I think)

Even ignoring the different versions of OS4, you have 9-10 partitions, which is basically obscene

P.S. If you don't backup, be prepared to loose everything when you least expect it... Perhaps a HD failure, or worse theft, or else just plain stupidity/carelessness

Last edited by ChrisH on 22-Apr-2007 at 09:16 AM.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...