Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: PFS vs SFS  (Read 3362 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AMC258Topic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2007
  • Posts: 877
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.AMC258.com/
PFS vs SFS
« on: December 22, 2007, 03:46:10 PM »
I thought it best to start a new thread.

I used PFS3 since it was first available, up until a month ago or so.

I know there are bugs, but none to do with long file names.  The only *PAIN* with long file names is if you copy from one partition to another and forget to 'setfnsize' first!  Which I have done many times!

The only bugs I've actually encountered are:
- If you use 'diskvalid' to try and fix errors, it will trash the whole drive.  I had this happen several times.
- The :.deldir/ quit working for me a couple of years ago, not sure why, maybe it's disk size?  For some reason every time I access that directory, I get partition trashing and GURUs.

Otherwise, PFS3 has been great!

I switched to SFS because I'd been hearing that SFS is the way to go, and I figured I might switch to a current FS before going to OS4.  Honestly, I couldn't get anyone to tell me what was better or worse about SFS.  I discovered SFS has a cache, so, I did a side-by-side comparison.  SFS was just a hair *slower*, not enough bother me.  I had a dead RAID disk so I needed to reformat everything anyway...

I do a LOT of the things that I now hear should be hosing SFS!  I run a Un*x style compiler that should do more damage than IBrowse, and I run that too.  I have had no problems, other than I lost a few files when I converted to SFS (I assume this is because of the dead RAID disk, I was running RAID 0).

Now I'm starting to think I had better switch back to PFS, and quick. :evil: Everyone agreed?

I will give this a few hours to decide.  I can do a backup in the meanwhile.  There goes my holiday weekend...
Get up!  Get up!  Get outta here!  GONE!
  - Bob Uecker
 

Offline AMC258Topic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2007
  • Posts: 877
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.AMC258.com/
Re: PFS vs SFS
« Reply #1 on: December 22, 2007, 04:08:17 PM »
Okay, sorry, I should have mentioned, this is related to thread
Previous SFS thread

 :-o Maybe I spoke too soon!  I just formatted my backup drive to get ready to back up and PFS crashed badly!
Get up!  Get up!  Get outta here!  GONE!
  - Bob Uecker
 

Offline AMC258Topic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2007
  • Posts: 877
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.AMC258.com/
Re: PFS vs SFS
« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2007, 06:11:29 PM »
I had memory corruption, that was the problem.  It was a long time since I rebooted, and at some point I'm sure I had run completely out of memory.

PFS3 doesn't allow more than 600 buffers on any drive I've ever had.

I did write a defrag program for PFS once (really simple), but what I found was that the drive was never fragged enough to bother, and defragging wasted more time that I'd save if the drive was defragged for a while.
Get up!  Get up!  Get outta here!  GONE!
  - Bob Uecker
 

Offline AMC258Topic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2007
  • Posts: 877
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.AMC258.com/
Re: PFS vs SFS
« Reply #3 on: February 03, 2008, 06:04:38 PM »
SFS is now banished from my system.  Well, almost.  I have a drive that never gets written to, it's too big for PFS3 w/ OS4, and I'm too lazy to convert it to FFS.

Someday, the SFS issue with corrupting files will be resolved.  Until then, I'll stick with PFS3 which has never corrupted any of my files through normal use.
Get up!  Get up!  Get outta here!  GONE!
  - Bob Uecker