From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 29 03:44:25 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4908C1065676 for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:44:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Received: from sola.nimnet.asn.au (paqi.nimnet.asn.au [220.233.188.227]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D18F8FC0A for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:44:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sola.nimnet.asn.au (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m7T3iKEs081345; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:44:22 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:44:20 +1000 (EST) From: Ian Smith To: Wojciech Puchar In-Reply-To: <20080828120024.4495910656D9@hub.freebsd.org> Message-ID: <20080829130947.F81044@sola.nimnet.asn.au> References: <20080828120024.4495910656D9@hub.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: defrag X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:44:25 -0000 On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:33:35 +0200 (CEST) Wojciech Puchar wrote: > CP/M was single-user and was used on floppies up to 360kB AFAIK, And MP/M was multi-user, using the same filesystem. From memory, there was perhaps one byte that indicated which user owned a file :) > NTFS is a theft of OS/2 HPFS. they didn't even bothered to use other > partition ID :), but they managed to f..k^H^H^H^Hextend it's > functionality, so it's actually even slower than FAT, and too - does > nothing to prevent fragmentation. It wasn't (straight-up) theft; MS cut a deal with IBM to use HPFS and OS/2, more or less in exchange for letting IBM licence Windows 3.1 as WINOS/2 When things went sour - google provides days of happy reading if you're interested - MS morphed it into NTFS for NT, cruelled the deal with IBM so OS/2 couldn't run NT/Win95 apps (signing OS/2's death warrant, though it took a long time to die) and stopped distributing OS/2 themselves. > This is normal, as Microsoft make a problems to be able to "fix" it > (creating 3 times more others) in new releases, so idiots continue to buy > new versions of windoze and new hardware, just to do as simple task as > writing a few-paged document or view a webpage Yeah, yeah :) I'd be surprised if NTFS isn't as defrag-proof as HPFS, which as I recall had self-defragging garbage-collecting features built in; certainly I never felt the need to defrag any HPFS volumes, and I used it for quite a few years to run BBS and Fidonet stuff, not once losing any data .. HPFS was a very resiliant and reliable filesystem. If you compare: % find /usr/src -name "*hpfs* with % find /usr/src -name "*ntfs* you'll go 'hmmm ..' and if you look through the sources you'll see whole large slabs of code that are shared between those two implementations, by the same author. I've never tried writing to HPFS volumes, but I did recover many years of work and play from a number of HPFS disks and still hope to do some more someday, so I was glad to see the code is still there in 7.0 .. cheers, Ian