| From: | Xavier Messersmith |
| Date: | 1 Feb 2000 at 00:07:07 |
| Subject: | Re: P F S (was OS 3.5 FAQ v1.0) |
From: Xavier Messersmith <xcaliber@xav.to>
On 31-Jan-00, Jw wrote:
> On 30-Jan-00, James Hays wrote:
> I have PFS2.x
> I /did/ once have a disaster, when I lost most of my stuff. I can't exactly
> remember what happened. So I know that even this has to be used carefully.
Only if you want to keep the results of a batch copy. You must wait about 1.5
seconds for a little but recognizable blip of SCSI activity before doing the
plug-pulling trick. :-)
If you don't care about the newly copied files or you're accidentally deleting
all your files then a sytem reset would be in order (possibly resulting in
zero deleted files, even after a few hundered have been reported deleted).
> Under OS3.5BB1, I have not heard a squimmer of a murmur from PFS2. Yet I've
> seen one or two slighly worrisome e-mails posted about PFS3.x (forgive me
> for not remembering the details).
I'd remember any conclusive remarks about a filesystem of doom.
Nothing to report on this front.
> Taking all the above into account, I thought, and still think, the u/g price
> a bit steep for 3.x, so I am still on 2.x.
>
> The *big* question:
> AM I MAKING A MISTAKE?
Well, PFS3 offers a bigger delete directory (?992? files if you want) and
longer filenames. Likely a few performance tweaks as well. Be sure to do the
patch if you do get it (harmless .deldir strangeness). If you get the upgraded
PFSDoctor out of the patch, send me a copy. (I hate those install scripts)
--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds. Get rates as low as 0.0 percent
Intro APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW.
<a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/NextcardCreativeCL ">Click Here</a>
------------------------------------------------------------------------