Filesystem super slow on directories with big/many files

[Jose]

I seem to remember some problems related to this but I had never experienced them.
I'm using SFS, block size 512 and all that. I opened a drawer with may files in it and the system stoped responding to file operations. After a whole bunch of time, probably more than 1 minute it got back. I opened NotePad and it spit out an out of memory message!!! The menu bar shows 30MB free or more so I wonder what da heck is going on, is there a way to fix this ? Maybe the stack ? Will tinker more with it later but would like to hear your opinions.

:pint:

[ChaosLord]

Use FFS or PFS.

[AmigaMance]

@jose
 How many files do you have in that directory? More than 1000? In such case, the slow-down is inevitable. You need to distribute the files to more than 1 directory.
 How many buffers do you have assigned to the partition where this directory resides? I suspect that they are not enough. Increase them to 512 or even more.
 You can also increase the SFS read-ahead buffers by using the SFSCache command and see if things get better.
Also, you need to make sure that the the Mask value of this partition points to a location in the Fast-ram.

[Jose]

Well, one of the advertised features of SFS is "FAST reading of directories".

Buffers were set to 80, mask to oxffffffff, don't think these are too low values (for the buffers).. as 80 corresponds to 40Kb.

I've deleted the directory meanwhile and don't really know where I got it from, it was in an old HD I had lying around, just remember it had alot of small scanned images from a text book.

[stefcep2]

My experience with SFS is that its still unreliable.  I get odd errors, even in emulators so its not my Amiga hardware thats doing it, even when using pre-installed environments.  PF is probably the best balance between reliability and speed

[Jose]

Is PFS still for sale ? I found it using Google but would prefer to not use a pirated copy if it's still not abandonware...

[Damion]

Jose wrote:
Is PFS still for sale ? I found it using Google but would prefer to not use a pirated copy if it's still not abandonware...

I would hunt down a copy of PFS3 - it's simply awesome. Super fast, very reliable in my experience. Even things like Mac filedisks are blazing fast in comparison to hosting them on an FFS partition. (Not like Shapeshifter is much use these days, but still... ;-))

I've heard mixed things about SFS. I'm about to try it on my A2K, and I certainly hope it's better than FFS... though I'm doubtful it will match the speed of PFS3.

[DamageX]

The problem is probably workbench and not the filesystem (although I'd go with more buffers and larger block size, myself). When opening a drawer with a lot of files it has to create a ridiculously huge window in RAM and draw all the icons (or fill in all the text if it is a list). When browsing my PC's harddrive from my A2000 I would often run out of chipmem (even with 2MB).

[Jose]

@Damage

The SFS docs say the optimal block size is 512.
As for the huge window in RAM is that really necessary or it's just the way it works ?
Yeah, now that you mention it I've had that problem browsing my PC's files too a couple of years ago when the nr of files is huge.

[Framiga]

you have to use at least 400 dosbuffers with SFS and tweaking with the SFSConfig tool.

[Jose]

@Framiga

Will give that a try, thanks.
I was hopping it would have a sensible config out of the box...

[Mark]

The problem is probably workbench and not the filesystem

I agree with you there.  Workbench takes a long time to render 1000 icons.  The problem is worse if using the "Show All Files" option when DefIcons is running since DefIcons will load the first block of every file to determine which icon to use.

(although I'd go with more buffers and larger block size, myself)

More buffers, certainly, but using a larger block size to speed performance may be a peculiarity specific to FFS.  In my experience, a block size larger than 512 makes SFS slow down, not speed up.