SFS problem

[AmiDude]

Sfs is a good filesystem, its much faster than FFS...

People keep saying that all the time. But SysInfo reports the same speed for partions
formatted with FFS. For example:

I have an A1200/030/50Mhz 64MB - KickROMs 3.1 - WB 3.1 - 2GB HD.
Partition #1: 100MB, FFS filesystem.
Partition #2: 250MB, FFS filesystem.
Partition #3: 1650MB, SFS filesystem, (I've set the right mask and max transfer from
the SFS readme file)

SysInfo reports for all 3 partitions 2,5MB/s. So how does it come that SFS filesystem
isn't any faster?  :confused:
The same goes for my A1200 with 060 CPU.

[AmiDude]

Is SysInfo even using the filesystem?

SysInfo is a program that has an option that can measure the speed of your hardisk.
It doesn't matter if the partition is SFS or FFS.

[AmiDude]

So no point in mentioning it in a comparision of performance between filesystems?

Well, I thought it just would measure the speed of the different partitions.
So the SFS partition should be faster, but SysInfo doesn't notice the speed difference.
And honestly, I can't notice it as well in overall usage. And like mentioned before:
SFS is very buggy.
I only use the SFS partition for ADF files with long names.