Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!nuchat!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Disk Errors. AmigaDOS file system.
Message-ID: <1370@sugar.UUCP>
Date: 6 Jan 88 12:45:37 GMT
References: <1338@sugar.UUCP> <37823@sun.uucp>
Organization: Sugar Land UNIX - Houston, TX
Lines: 29

In article <37823@sun.uucp>, cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) writes:
> 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?

> Uh, Peter, we do have multiple sectors/track. About 11 last time I checked.

Not really. You sort of have multiple sectors in that the operating system
supports reading and writing less than a whole track by reading the track,
changing a sector, and writing it out again. You don't have multiple sectors
in the classical sense, where the basic hardware operation is to read and write
a single sector. If you get a disk error on a track, you basically have to
write off (heh) that entire track.

> 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.

Yes, and that's a seperate issue that I addressed in the body of the article.

> The most you should lose 
> is one block of one file, everything else can be recovered from information
> on the disk.

Well, actually, you can lose up to 11 blocks of 1 file, or 1 block of 11
files, or...
-- 
-- Peter da Silva  `-_-'  ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter
-- Disclaimer: These U aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.