It's hard to communicate the loss 2 years ago when, a setup I believed to be "bullet proof", went belly up. I had 2 HDs, both 4 Gig Quantums, each a mirror of the other, installed. They both corrupted on different partitions but within a month of each other. Is there something strange in PFS2? Could it happen again in PFS3?
I communicate with many many Amiga users.
A great number have complained about data going missing when using SFS.
Several people have complained of data going missing on PFS3.
Because of all these complaints I have just stuck with good old reliable FFS all these years.
I do want to try out PFS3 though. The lure of faster speed is hard to resist
but the possibility of losing data is scary. :nervous:
I love the guy who coded PFS3. He is very very cool. I love Piru for helping to continue its development a bit.
But it just seems to me, looking at it from the perspective of a business manager, that there is a certain level of risk involved in switching to PFS3.
If PFS3 is in fact 100% reliable then it means that all the people who complained about PFS3 were either:
A: Idiots
B: Had defective hard drives.
C: Had defective HD controllers
D: Had defective ram in their ancient Amigas
E: Had unreliable electrical power coming through the wall socket.
F: Had defective Power Supplies.
G: Running some evil hack or buggy program that corrupted the filesystem.
H: Other?
I realize that A-H are completely possible and that PFS3 might be 80000% reliable. But I don't know for a fact.
I hope this analysis helps you in some way
