English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Support > support.Apps

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 13 March 2018, 01:46   #21
idrougge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 3,679
I've run SFS since 1999 and PFS since last year (I have several Amigas) and wouldn't change back to FFS any day. No file system is a replacement for backups — what files I have lost, I have lost to unreliable media.
idrougge is offline  
Old 13 March 2018, 02:07   #22
AMIGASYSTEM
Registered User
AMIGASYSTEM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Brindisi (Italy)
Posts: 3,903
On my A4000 i have always used PFS2 and PFS3 used PFS also for floppies DD/HD (AF0) that were super fast compared to floppies OFS and FFS. With PFS I've never lost a data, and thanks to .deldir (set on Dopus4) i recovered the deleted files.

The only negative thing about PFS is the truncated files, when a copying was interrupted for a crash or or did not expect the right time for copying. Another problem was the corruption of the Filesystem which was automatically corrected thanks to a utility (Valid, if i remember correctly) that was at the top of the startup-sequence

On WinUAE since many years use SFS on mine HardFile it is also here I have never lost or invalidated a Hardfile (i have no experience of SFS su HardDisk Real).

Last edited by AMIGASYSTEM; 13 March 2018 at 02:24.
AMIGASYSTEM is offline  
Old 13 March 2018, 02:09   #23
wawa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: berlin/germany
Posts: 1,012
i must align with thomas and toni. i have experienced sfs as completely unreliable in a long run. even though i have got sfssalv and partition magic or whatever it was called on os4 to run it was to alike effect, namely nothing or yet more mess. never again.
wawa is offline  
Old 13 March 2018, 07:30   #24
Foebane
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Cardiff, UK
Age: 46
Posts: 1,402
I wanted to leave FFS because I hate the 30-char filename limit, but some people warned me off of it because the utilities wouldn't work with anything other than FFS, but I would still like to go to PFS, but it seems like a ridiculous minefield of file formats on Amiga, I had no idea how bad it was.
Foebane is offline  
Old 13 March 2018, 08:28   #25
ShK
In carbonite
ShK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Lahti / Finland
Age: 47
Posts: 328
When I did Apollo core testing daily a few years, pfs3aio is only filesystem which survived of this strain. I have one original CF with pfs3aio, which is still working 100% after 3y of nasty power cycles and crashes. FFS gave up first on this kind of usage.
ShK is offline  
Old 13 March 2018, 11:45   #26
jPV
Registered User
jPV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: RNO
Posts: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foebane View Post
I wanted to leave FFS because I hate the 30-char filename limit, but some people warned me off of it because the utilities wouldn't work with anything other than FFS, but I would still like to go to PFS, but it seems like a ridiculous minefield of file formats on Amiga, I had no idea how bad it was.
Old disk repairing tools like ABTools (my absolutely favourite for fixing FFS), DiskSalv, QBTools, etc, don't work with anything than FFS and also limit the partition/disk space to 2/4GB. If you want to use bigger drives, then the argument isn't valid anymore.

With my couple decades daily experience with these newer filesystems and decade before that with FFS, I would say that the situation sounds worse than it really is. If you take care of few basic things and don't stress the filesystem too much, it's pretty rare that you end up with filesystem errors or data loss.

First, check your partition start and end points before taking them in use after creating them in HDToolbox. Some version(s) of HDToolbox created overlapping partitions, which is especially bad for SFS/PFS when that overlapping area gets written.

Second, avoid rebooting or turning off the machine by all means if there's ongoing write process. Remember to watch HD led or install some software HD led on your OS. SFS/PFS have better tolerance for this, but still better to avoid.

Third, if you have crashed programs in the system, avoid writing to HD at that point. Do only absolute necessary data saving and reboot as soon as you can. If some program has trashed the memory, you never know where it affects, it's possible that it has trashed the filesystem related memory too. I also wouldn't recommend to make uptime records on a system without memory protection like we have. I have tried and I'm pretty sure that's why I messed my system once when my IBrowse cache got written all over the files everywhere

FFS is actually the filesystem which needs repairing most, because it's quite fragile for writing interrupts (reboots, crashes, etc while writing). It was quite regular when you had to wait for drive to validate itself or use some of the mentioned repairing tools to fix checksum errors etc. Usually you can fix it though, but it's still annoying.

With PFS3 I had few annoying issues, basically it worked pretty fine, but with one HD it broke every now and then. It probably was HD's fault, because it was old and noisy SCSI HD, a bit suspicious drive... anyway I had to fix it constantly with the DiskValid program, but it got fixed nevertheless. For other HDs it worked otherwise fine, but I found a reproduceable way to totally mess it up (by just trying to rename a write protected file over ftp), and that's why I lost my trust to it and switched to SFS. It was a rare case and I guess I'd kept using it if I wouldn't have run an FTP server 24/7 on my Amiga

The IBrowse cache accident happened with SFS, but I'm not sure if the filesystem can be blamed. I'm guessing it was more about IBrowse or other programs messing up the memory and that couldn't be avoided by any filesystem. I sticked for a long time with SFS 1.84, which was the latest from the original developer and newer ones were said to be buggy back then. It lasted fine for years without bigger problems. I had some 100GB drive for FTP with it and never got any problem with that. For my Workbench/Work partitions I got couple of unrecovable errors with SFS, and I had to backup and reformat the drive, but didn't lose much (practically any) data with it. Only one broken file when those errors happened.

Nowadays I have the latest SFS on my gaming A1200s, and SFS on my MorphOS machines since 2004, and nowadays also a data partition with the current MorphOS version of PFS, and they all have worked just fine. I do occasional checks with SFSCheck, but it's always fine.

So, my conclusion is that if you take care of your filesystems and avoid certain things, it's only very rare or unusual occasions when you get them broken. I wouldn't be frightened to use the newer filesystems, they have some very appealing features anyway (speed, filenames, .recycled/.deldir, support for big drives, etc).

But in any case, always make backups of important data
jPV is offline  
Old 13 March 2018, 13:02   #27
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 45
Posts: 3,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by jPV View Post
I sticked for a long time with SFS 1.84, which was the latest from the original developer and newer ones were said to be buggy back then.
Hmm... My version says 1.58.
If newer versions are buggy this can explain the difference between the experiences we've had.
meynaf is online now  
Old 14 March 2018, 03:03   #28
idrougge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 3,679
I used 1.58 for the longest time.
idrougge is offline  
Old 14 March 2018, 15:16   #29
malko
Registered User

malko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: CH
Posts: 911
Searching for something else related to PFS3, I found this in the FAQ of PFS3 (had forgotten about it ).
Look at the last ยง.
Mark Harden, your attitude is

Code:
What is SFS ?

SFS, or Smart File System, is another filesystem being developed for the
Amiga by John Hendrikx.  It is currently at its 13th beta release. Visit
the SFS web-site for more details.

PFS-2 is faster and more reliable than SFS at the moment.  Things could
change. Competition is healthy !  We should support anybody developing
software for the Amiga.
malko is offline  
Old 14 March 2018, 15:42   #30
daxb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,114
You need to know that the doc (1999) is 19 years old and 8 years behind SFS development (2007). So maybe things have changed.
daxb is offline  
Old 14 March 2018, 15:45   #31
Akira
Registered User

Akira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 19,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by malko View Post
Things could
change. Competition is healthy ! We should support anybody developing
software for the Amiga
100% agree! It only makes things better.
Akira is offline  
Old 14 March 2018, 15:45   #32
AMIGASYSTEM
Registered User
AMIGASYSTEM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Brindisi (Italy)
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by meynaf View Post
Hmm... My version says 1.58.
If newer versions are buggy this can explain the difference between the experiences we've had.
I've been using it for many years SFS v1.277 (2007) I've never had a single problem on my HardFiles (not tested on Real AMiGA, where I think I can change something)
AMIGASYSTEM is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OFS/FFS/SFS/PFS Editor Dialog Leandro Jardim request.UAE Wishlist 2 25 January 2014 10:16
FFS and SFS amigappc project.ClassicWB 8 07 January 2011 13:21
Which is better SFS or PFS source support.Apps 23 19 August 2010 19:00
Filesystem overhead of FFS rare_j support.Other 2 16 March 2009 20:00
pfs or sfs oldpx support.Apps 14 08 March 2003 00:33

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 13:36.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Page generated in 0.07852 seconds with 15 queries