Alternate FileSystems

[xyth]

I was wondering if anyone had any advice/experience/warnings about using filesystems other than FFS, i.e PFS, SFS etc?

My system:

A1200 w/68030+68882+32MB
4xEIDE interface
IDE 4GB HD, 40x CD-Rom, ZIP 100
OS3.5 and DirOpus 5.82

Is it worth it, or are there too many compatibility issues?  (In particular, if I wanted to get a larger HD).

What Filesystems are you talking about?
You must name them.

[xyth]

PFS (Professional File System)

SFS (Safe File System?)

and any others that I don't know about.

[Vincent]

I've never used PFS, but I've heard good things about it.

I use SFS on 8 partitions and FFS on 2 partitions (a 20GB HD :-D).  I've kept Workbench and my documents on the FFS ones.  So far I've not had any problems with using SFS.  I've had a few Guru's while writing to an SFS partition, but it's been fine after the reboot.  No need to use WaitVal ever again for those partitions, it's great :-D



Just to make it clear
HD1 and HD2 are FFS
HD3 - HD10 are SFS

Under OS3.5 I could only see HD1 - HD4
Under OS3.9 I could see them all.

I think that's the fault of OS3.5's SetPatch.

PFS3 and SFS have advantages over FFS. They are faster, saver and supprt longer Filenames with 107 Chars.

PFS3 18.5 - Professional Filesystem works O.K.
Use the regular version not the SCSI direct one.

SFS 1.205 - Smart Filesystem works O.K.
Seems to be a bit slower than the older Version 1.84 I was using before.

BFFS - Berkeley Filesystem, doesn't seem to be working here.

You could also use the MS type Filesystems like CrossDos or fat95, but I didn't try them on Harddisk, yet.

[SilvrDrgn]

Amiga1200PPC wrote:

PFS3 18.5 - Professional Filesystem works O.K.
Use the regular version not the SCSI direct one.

I'm using the Direct SCSI version on my A4000T internal IDE controller and it works fine.  In fact, I believe the documentation says that is what should be used for the best speed.   Why do you say not to use the Direct SCSI version??

[Samuar]

ext2 or jfs ;-)
nice linux kernel req.