Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!mintaka!geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu!rjc From: rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Some WB2.0 Peeves Message-ID: <1991Jun26.222126.17604@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> Date: 26 Jun 91 22:21:26 GMT References: <1991Jun25.032545.7153@marlin.jcu.edu.au> <1991Jun25.112729.27772@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> Sender: news@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu Organization: The Internet Lines: 34 In article lron@easy.lrcd.com (Dwight Hubbard) writes: >In article <1991Jun25.112729.27772@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@churchy.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >>>>BTW, Why on earth didn't C= come up with a decent file system? The FFS >>>is no better (I can't tell any difference) for floppies and is the >>>worst file system I have ever seen. Having studied and implemented some >>>real file systems I'd like to know where C= copied their's from and >>>WHY? >> >> Hmm, the FFS seems much faster for floppies in 2.0. The filesystem has >>had many improvements. Why don't you tell us why it sucks? The Amiga >>filesystem is slower at scanning directories than it is at locating >>a file (e.g. a cp file1 file2 file3 file4 file5 file6 ... file40 destdir >>will locate all the files very quickly, but a "list" will take a while. >>On the opposite end, IBM dirs come up quickly, but sometimes they take a >>long time to open a file, like on a locate bbs with over 500 files >>in one of the dirs, it takes 5-9 seconds to "lock" the file down downloading. >>) Also, file notification has been added. > >I Ran Diskspeed on both Old FS floppies and FFS floppies and didn't see any >significant speedup, although I could store more information on the disk. >The speedup is very noticable with a faster device such as a hard drive >though and I don't see where the FFS can be called anything but a real file >system when there have been people claiming 1.5+Mbps on FFS hard drives on >the A3000. Well on floppies there is not much raw transfer speed speedup, but there is a slight speed up when scanning lots of files or having 2 tasks access the disk at once (not as much "gronk gronk grind gronk"). On a harddrive the speed increase is ALOT. Especially on an A3000. -- / INET:rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu * // The opinions expressed here do not \ | INET:r_cromwe@upr2.clu.net | \X/ in any way reflect the views of my self.| \ UUCP:uunet!tnc!m0023 * /