Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!oliveb!sun!pepper!cmcmanis
From: cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Disk Errors. AmigaDOS file system.
Message-ID: <37823@sun.uucp>
Date: 4 Jan 88 23:52:49 GMT
References: <1338@sugar.UUCP>
Sender: news@sun.uucp
Reply-To: cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View
Lines: 20

In article <1338@sugar.UUCP> peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes:
>While I'm on this subject, how about dumping the "one sector per track"
>business and going to a conventional track/sector type arrangement? What
>you lose in rotational latency you more than gain in reliability. Hell,
>you can even read a track at a time ANYWAY. No skin off my nose.

Uh, Peter, we do have multiple sectors/track. About 11 last time I checked.
I agree that writing to a disk with a bad block should not be fatal, however
with the current filesystem it would cause problems with conventional disk
interfaces (like using a WD or NEC chip) as well. The most you should lose 
is one block of one file, everything else can be recovered from information
on the disk. As a Request For Enhancement, I think it would be nice to add
a 'bad block' bitmap. If a new mount command with user selectable file
systems is created you could do it that way. (Or get down and dirty and 
replace the task pointer in the device nodes, handler task with one of your
own.). 

--Chuck McManis
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis   BIX: cmcmanis  ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.