@ChrisH

Quote:

you have 9-10 partitions, which is basically obscene

Well, not everything is so limited like a PC partition table which only
allows four partitions IIRC (not counting extensions here).

IMHO its always a good idea to limit the maximum partition size to the
maximum size of your backup media. With a typical harddisk size of 160GB
and a typical backup media size of 4GB (DVD), this approach would result in upto
fourty partitions where the user can start with three or four partitions
and create more on demand

Using partitions which are much larger than 4GB seems like a good idea at first
sight but you will probably regret it when FFS needs to validate such a partition
"forever" or when PartitionWizard cant get enough memory to repair it. I'd use
such large partitions only for non-important data.

@ChrisH

Quote:

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

The point *I* find obscene is in the waste of good diskspace like in partition 'OS_4.0 r2', 'OS_4.0 r3 and 'OS_4.0 r4. They could have been allocated using only 100Mb each, 300Mb for the three of them. I've given them 765Mb in total. A waste of 465Mb. The HD my 2/H A1200 came with was only 80Mb bigger in size! What a waste! What an obscenity!

I like small partitions and not only for the reason TetiSoft stated. I like them for leaving space to maneouver when thing are running out of hand. Still 100Gb left: plenty of room me thinks!

OldFart

EDIT: When I have both the time and courage, I might readjust UAE's partition to a hugely smaller one, leaving the current one to be put into use by one of the other, smaller partitions threatening not yet apparent overflow.

Last edited by OldFart on 22-Apr-2007 at 03:44 PM.

_________________
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!

@OldFart

I really don't understand what they're all on about. The hardest thing is to think of new volume names ...

--->8---
Enhed     Størrelse       Brugt       Ledig Fuld Fejl Status                  Navn
CD0:      Ingen disk i drevet 
CD1:      Ingen disk i drevet 
CDMRW:    Ingen disk i drevet 
CDRW:     Ingen disk i drevet 
DH0:         1.024M     235.912     812.696  22%    0 Må både læses og ændres Workbench
DH1:            10G   6.276.013   4.209.779  60%    0 Må både læses og ændres Work
DH11:           32G  13.883.097   2.894.135  83%    0 Må både læses og ændres Save
DH2:           512M     505.835      18.485  96%    0 Må både læses og ændres BW
DH20:          512M      59.860     202.300  23%    0 Må både læses og ændres FastVal
DH21:           75G  22.109.469  17.212.147  56%    0 Må både læses og ændres Music
DH22:           75G  27.356.611  11.965.005  70%    0 Må både læses og ændres Video
DH23:           39G  19.616.374   1.051.994  95%    0 Må både læses og ændres Back
DH3:           256M      48.536      82.552  37%    0 Må både læses og ændres WBT
DH30:          512M      49.013     213.147  19%    0 Må både læses og ændres FastValB
DH31:           75G  38.356.849     964.767  98%    0 Må både læses og ændres MusicB
DH32:           75G   1.640.628  37.680.988   4%    0 Må både læses og ændres Udv
DH33:           39G  18.384.256   2.284.112  89%    0 Må både læses og ændres BackB
DH4:           256M      60.459      70.613  46%    0 Må både læses og ændres WBF
DH40:          512M      59.507     202.657  23%    0 Må både læses og ændres FastVal-M
DH41:           75G  22.109.469  17.212.143  56%    0 Må både læses og ændres Music-M
DH42:           75G  27.356.611  11.965.001  70%    0 Må både læses og ændres Video-M
DH43:           39G  19.616.374   1.051.994  95%    0 Må både læses og ændres Back-M
DH44:           89G  46.559.987     394.417  99%    0 Må både læses og ændres Res-A
DH5:            20G  18.174.092   2.797.460  87%    0 Må både læses og ændres Spare
DH50:          512M      49.013     213.151  19%    0 Må både læses og ændres FastValB-M
DH51:           75G  38.356.849     964.763  98%    0 Må både læses og ændres MusicB-M
DH52:           75G   1.681.795  37.639.817   4%    0 Må både læses og ændres Udv-M
DH53:           39G  18.384.256   2.284.112  89%    0 Må både læses og ændres BackB-M
DH54:           89G 178.505.077   9.312.539  95%    0 Må både læses og ændres Res-B
DH6:            20G  17.001.786   3.969.766  81%    0 Må både læses og ændres Extra
DH7:            30G  10.909.686   5.079.930  68%    0 Må både læses og ændres SaveMore
DVD+RW:   Ingen disk i drevet 
ENV:           425K         425           0 100%    0 Må både læses og ændres Env
FD0:      Ingen disk i drevet 
RAM:            53K          53           0 100%    0 Må både læses og ændres RAM Disk
TEXTCLIP:      282M          70 296.738.816   0%    0 Må både læses og ændres TextClip
ZIP0:     Ingen disk i drevet 
--->8---

@nbache

OMG!

I usually have two partitions. DH0: (sys: Workbench) and DH1: (hostname of system:) From time to time a TEMP: or something sneaks in but that's often just temporary. Also LNX and SWP but those aren't automounted.

On my OS4 beta system I have an additional 3 partitions for sys:

Never really understood the need for more partitions, even back in the days when I had Work: and Games: I just ended up moving data back and forth since the partition I was using got full.

What's wrong with folders and assigns ??

/shoe

@nbache

Eep! That sure looks more like it should be! Here we see one of the true powers of Amiga (and RDB): volumes as many as you want.

But spotting many of them in the size realm of T5G one can only wonder what kind of (Amiga)machine this is. If I can count a bit (sic!) there's more then 1200Gb in that machine.

My question is then what it is all for? (Here's 120Gb of which only some 20Gb is in use...)

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!

@shoe

Quote:

What's wrong with folders and assigns ??

No swearing here please, sir! The term folders leans to much to oppressing OS's terminology and should be avoided at all cost. Drawers it is! Or directories, but that's DOS-talk. And none of those OS's has something as powerfull a command as the Amiga's Assign-command.
But there's nothing wrong with them. On an Amiga you are free to do as *YOU* deem wise.

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!

@TetiSoft

Quote:

Using partitions which are much larger than 4GB seems like a good idea at firstsight but you will probably regret it when FFS needs to validate such a partition"forever" or when PartitionWizard cant get enough memory to repair it.

Not to mention that if a partition "goes down", it is far easier to accept the loss of a 200MB partition than one > 4GB.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@nbache

Quote:

DH0:

etc.

The only thing I do differently is add the extra "0" placeholder for my HD device #s. Then all programs come out neat and tidy alphbetically speaking:
DH00:
DH01:
etc.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@OldFart

Quote:

But there's nothing wrong with them. On an Amiga you are free to do as *YOU* deem wise.

Hmm...for me that means 2 HDs of equal size and identical partition sizes.
Then it is simply a matter of a straight partition to partition copy across the two drives for backup.
DH00:(on drive #0) > DH10:(on drive #1)
DH01:(on drive #0) > DH11:(on drive #1)
etc.

Volume names correspondingly:
FINAL > final_backup or backup_final or similar
PROGRAMS > programs_backup or backup_programs or similar

Easy to spot this way at a glance.
Also, keeping one partition always empty that is equal to the size of the largest other partition on the drive works extremely well for "cleaning the drive"
Copy largest partition to that "empty" partition, reformat the largest partition, and copy back from that "empty" partition. I would suspect that this is WAY faster than any reorg utility can -ever- achieve.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@all

OK i'm going to test SFS now... damn! Sorry for this stupid question... but what i need to install SFS? It is integrated in OS4 final? In MediaTool box i see SFS/00 if i remember correctly. Do i need only to change that and reformat my partition? Luckily i have (only?) 3 partitions So i can copy my data.

_________________
ikir

A guide on IntuitionBase says this:
Quote:

3.3e Maxtransfer Should be (A1200ppc/A4000ppc OS4) 1FE00 and A1/Sii0680/Sii3112 it should be 0x7FFFFFFF 3.3f Mask should be (A1200ppc/A4000ppc OS4) 0xFFFFFFFE and A1/Sii0680/Sii3112 it should be 0xFFFFFFFE

Is it correct?

_________________
ikir

@ikir

Again... why with SFS is not possible to do a complete format but only a quick one?

_________________
ikir

@OldFart

Quote:

OldFart wrote: @nbache [...] But spotting many of them in the size realm of T5G one can only wonder what kind of (Amiga)machine this is. If I can count a bit (sic!) there's more then 1200Gb in that machine.

Yep, a bit over a TB. I have one PATA and four SATA disks, the SATA disks come to 1 TB alone. They are sitting on an SiI3114 card in my A1 XE/G4@800. I did have to mount an extra fan blowing on the end of that stack of disks and leave a small hatch open for a good airflow, so it's not the quietest of systems

Quote:

My question is then what it is all for? (Here's 120Gb of which only some 20Gb is in use...)

What can I say -- I guess I'm just a pack rat

Well, half of that TB is used for mirroring the other half (and a little more to mirror the PATA disk). Notice how many of the volume names have an "-M" tacked on at the end? Those are mirrors of the others. I have made a script that sets up the fs-caches and relaxes the flush strategy for each receiving partition in turn and then uses MirrorCopy to sync them. It runs for my whole system in around 1.5 hours. I don't use it every night, but close. It is almost as good as real backups, but of course I do save off important stuff like digital photos, mail and other personal data to offline - and offsite - media on a regular basis, just in case there is a fire or something.

Oh, and I have FFS2 on all partitions, except one of the big ones, which I use as a sort of temporary workspace for large things, and is not being mirrored. That one got reformatted to SFS some time ago, and yes, it is an impressive performance. But FFS2 does quite nicely in normal daily work, and I feel better knowing there are recovery options.

Best regards,

Niels

Last edited by nbache on 24-Apr-2007 at 07:33 PM.

@number6

Quote:

number6 wrote: @nbache Quote: DH0: etc. The only thing I do differently is add the extra "0" placeholder for my HD device #s. Then all programs come out neat and tidy alphbetically speaking: DH00: DH01: etc. #6

Ah, good idea. I'll do that if I find a good occasion to change it.

Best regards,

Niels

@ikir

OS4 Final comes with SmartFileSystem v1.267 in Kickstart, the latest is v1.270 on the SFS site. Just change the partition to SFS, buffers=500, blocksize=512, maxtransfer=maximum, mask=any memory. Ok it back to where it says the status of the disk has been modified & save the changes to the disk. In WB, quick format the partition & you're done, no need to do a full format. Updating the filesystem is easy, just replace the SmartFileSystem file in Kickstart with the updated file & the partition will use the update, but only after kickstart is reloaded (a cold boot).

_________________
Hate tends to make you look stupid...

@olsen

Quote:

(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.

Hehe no need to groan.

I know the limitations of FFS/FFS2. My post post was more of a complaint to the tester
rather than the actual file system.
Does it actually take 128sec to copy two 300MB files over two partions with SFS?
What about FFS2->FFS2 167sec? No, I don't think so as others seem to have proven.

I use SFS myself since 1.5 year ago or so. It's quite fast but my µA1 is a bit slower
than my Windows (NTFS) managing files. Especially copying large files is slower.
I guess throughput of harddisk device drivers aren't as optimized as their Windows
counterparts.. I can live with that because we have smaller files and alot less of them.

_________________
/Harry

[SOLD] µA1-C - 750GX 800MHz - 512MB - Antec Aria case

Avatar by HNL_DK!

@sundown

Thanks! Anyway i have already done (i downloaded lastest SFS before). It seems faster. I'm using 1000 buffers now.. but reading this thread it does not make any difference, doesn't it?

_________________
ikir

@ikir

A buffer setting of 1000 will work just fine in your case. Enjoy the speed.

_________________
Hate tends to make you look stupid...

@ikir

Quote:

Thanks! Anyway i have already done (i downloaded lastest SFS before). It seems faster. I'm using 1000 buffers now.. but reading this thread it does not make any difference, doesn't it?

At least not here. I changed the amount of buffers several times but the performance stayed the same. At least with copying files from a partition to another.
I didn't got time enough yet to test it in a daily use.

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

Quote:

by Rit on 20-Apr-2007 0:48:10 @Mopemen You also need to take into consideration where the data your copying is physically on the disk as well, as hard disks vary in speed between the middle and the edge of the disk. The 7200rpm SATA disk in my computer varies between 53MB/s and 29MB/s because of this.

@Rit: Hard drive speeds can indeed differ across its surface, impacting data transfer rates like your mentioned discrepancy on a SATA hard drive's performance at the edge versus middle. It’s important for optimizing transfers to consider these variations.