home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!Germany.EU.net!unido!sbsvax!mpii02000.cs.uni-sb.de!atoenne
- From: atoenne@mpii02000.cs.uni-sb.de (Andreas Toenne)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
- Subject: Re: Why do I get less hd space under HPFS than FAT??!?!
- Message-ID: <20177@sbsvax.cs.uni-sb.de>
- Date: 23 Jul 92 07:27:29 GMT
- References: <1992Jul22.012601.18150@sdf.lonestar.org>
- Sender: news@sbsvax.cs.uni-sb.de
- Organization: Max-Planck-Institut f"ur Informatik
- Lines: 34
-
- In article <1992Jul22.012601.18150@sdf.lonestar.org>, mo@sdf.lonestar.org (Mohit Goyal) writes:
- |> Hello. I have a question I hope someone can answer.
- |>
- |> I have a 130meg Maxtor 7120A IDE hd.
- |>
- |> It formats out to 129.9 megs under DOS 5 & FAT.
- |> It formats out to 127.1 megs under OS/2 & HPFS.
- |>
- |> Does anyone know why I lose 3 megs if I use HPFS? I thought that
- |> HPFS would give me more space than FAT because it uses smaller
- |> sector sizes than FAT, or something like that.
-
- Do not confuse the initial filesystem setup with gains from fewer fragmentation
- and partially unused sectors.
-
- Every filesystem needs some administration information to store allocation
- maps and root dirctory entries. Under the FAT-filesystem this was called the
- FAT :-) plus some sectors for the root directory.
- HPFS just preallocates some bigger space for its administration. If I am right
- it allocates a whole track in the middle of your partition. In the long run
- this gives you some benefits.
-
- Have you ever installed a filesystem on a Unix machine? Fast filesystem from
- Berkeley? The inodes there consume a considerable space.
-
- Andreas
- --
-
- Andreas Toenne Voice: x49 681 5846272
- Max-Planck-Institut Office: x49 681 302 5363
- fuer Informatik e-mail: atoenne@mpi-sb.mpg.de
-
- Im Stadtwald
- 6600 Saarbruecken, Germany
-