Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: stefcep2 on May 14, 2009, 02:55:33 PM
-
I want to use a 4 gig compact flash card on an A1200. Which filesystem is the fastest, most reliable, most efficient with storage space: FFS, PFS2, PFS3, SFS, FAT95?
-
You're using this as your HD hooked to an IDE adapter, yes? If so, I'd vote for SFS. It's free and readily available on Aminet. Fat95? Oh no you didn't! lol
-
I also vote for SFS. It's free, it's fast and it's still being worked on.
I'm using it since 2003 and never had a problem.
-
SFS all the way (http://strohmayer.org/)
-
Easy, PFS3.
-
No
-
PFS3 is the best.
-
OFS! lol ;-)
-
stefcep2 wrote:
I want to use a 4 gig compact flash card on an A1200. Which filesystem is the fastest, most reliable, most efficient with storage space: FFS, PFS2, PFS3, SFS, FAT95?
Definitely PFS3. *Huge* performance boost over FFS, and (to a lesser extent) SFS.
-
for all those who advocate PFS,
1 - is it still possible to buy PFS ?
2 - is the performance difference big enough to justify the purchase ?
3 - when was PFS last updated ?
-
Interesting how "cost", or "better because it is free" always seems to creep into discussions about what is "best". I don't look at things that way. If something is better than another competing thing the cost, or price/performance ratio might influence what I buy, but it does not change my opinion on which one is the "best".
If I limited my decisions to buy, or use something solely based on price/performance ratios I would have left the Amiga community a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time ago. :lol:
Edit: (Glad I bought PFS3 when I had the chance a long time ago)
-
@countzero,
Get the free SFS and use it until you can find PFS3 for sale from someone like I did.
-
I'm already using SFS. I don't see any reason to buy PFS to gain %5.5 speed on saving my whdload games.
-
@AmigaDave
Like CountZero already said, PSF3 is not worth it when SFS does a great job also.
PSF3 is only a little faster than SFS and, more importantly, PSF3 is not updated anymore.
Price/performance ratio is important to me, and IMHO nothing can beat SFS.
Edit: If Joerg (Developer of SFS) decided to sell SFS instead of making it available for free, I would happily buy it.
-
amigadave wrote:
Interesting how "cost", or "better because it is free" always seems to creep into discussions about what is "best".
I mainly mentioned SFS because of the (lack) of availability of PFS3. Best in this case because:
a) use your Amiga straight away with SFS
b) not have to wait until you accidentally run across a copy of PFS
c) wait until you find an underground FTP that has PFS or ask a "buddy", which would be illegal and we all know the ethical ramifications of that! lol
...really, what other choices are out there to purchase this commercial file
system? And say in the meantime, you build up a large cache of goodies using SFS on your HD/CF Card and then you accidentally stumble upon PFS, you're going to have to make a backup, install PFS and then copy all that back. For those of us that don't use UAE, 4GB of transfer on an A1200 could take all day! lol
-
PFS3 is well worth it. Even though it hasn't been updated for ages it still beats SFS easily.
I not sure if that means more that PFS authors really rule than that SFS authors suck.
-
Piru wrote:
PFS3 is well worth it. Even though it hasn't been updated for ages it still beats SFS easily.
when was the last time you compared PFS performance to SFS ?
I thought you sold your amiga gear long ago ?
-
PFS3 is "The Best".
Though I honestly have no problem with FFS, other than the 31 char filenames.
What filesystem does the RAMdisk.device use? It seems to be fast, reliable and supports long filenames.
-
Psh....*I* happen to think that EXT3 is the best...... :-P
EXT4 is probably better, but I don't have an X64 machine. =C
-
I vote SFS because I'd rather have a filesystem where you can still contact the author if you have a problem :-)
-
@countzero
Problem with SFS is its performance deteriorates over time.
-
@countzero
when was the last time you compared PFS performance to SFS ?
Couple of years ago. Nothing important has happened to SFS since.
I thought you sold your amiga gear long ago ?
The only amiga gear I have ever sold was my old Blizzard 1230 when I upgraded to Blizzard PPC. My A1200 hasn't been set up for years however.
This is irrelevant however as I use PFS3 with MorphOS. Even emulated it still beats the native SFS.
-
@ChaosLord
What filesystem does the RAMdisk.device use?
There is no such device. However, ramdrive.device (RAD) uses whatever filesystem you use in the mountlist, by default FFS.
ram-handler (RAM Disk:) on the other hand has built-in filesystem. It is quite different from traditional filesystems as it only needs to keep the data in memory and never write it out to physical media.
-
funny enough i just noticed, i received a copy of pfs with the last machine i bought. i havnt examined the software box up till now. maybe i should give it a try even if sfs failed me sourly only once and i didnt have any serious problems with it ever since.
-
I hear ReiserFS is great, but only if you aren't married as it has a known tendency to murder your wife...
-
OK so PFS3 wins in the performance race. But what about reliability, and efficient use of available disk space? Any differences.
BTW I mentioned FAT95 only because it means I can read and write to the cf via windows...I think you can anyway
-
Well ZFS is the gold standard of file systems, but a) it's not available for the Amiga and b) it's serious overkill for a virtual drive.