Very strange SFS behavior.

[Thorham]

Hi,

When I was trying to clean up the mess on one of my Amiga HD partitions (SFS), I got checksum errors while deleting files. The strange thing is that no mater which file I try to delete, it's always the same block that has the error. The weirdest part is that after a reset, the file which couldn't be deleted because of the checksum error, can now be deleted, and when I continue to delete files, the error occurs again after deleting a couple of files, and of course it's the same block it happens in Very bizarre behavior indeed.

The partition is located in the first 4GB of the drive, there don't seem to be any interfering patches and I have an A1200+'030. The maxtransfer setting for all my partitions is 0x00010000, so that can't be it. The SFS filesystem structure test program reports the partition to be okay

Could it have anything to do with the large amount of files on the partition? This only started happening after temporarily copying a large number of extra files to the partition. I don't have a clue, and I don't know what to try

Any help is appreciated

[asm1]

http://wiki.abime.net/amiga:killergo...winuae_realhdd

According to this

Maxtransfer should be 0x1fe00.
Dont know if this is causing your problems, but its what I use and dont have any issues.

[alexh]

If you are using IDE you should use 0x1FE00 or lower

The ATA protocol the Amiga IDE uses has commands with a sector count field 8-bits wide. Each sector is 512 bytes. The maximum you can transfer is 255 sectors.

255 * 512 = 0x1FE00

SCSI is totally different.

[Thorham]

Thanks guys, but...

Originally Posted by asm1

http://wiki.abime.net/amiga:killergo...winuae_realhdd

According to this

Maxtransfer should be 0x1fe00.
Dont know if this is causing your problems, but its what I use and dont have any issues.

Tried it just to be sure, but it doesn't work. The maxtransfer setting limits the amount of data transfered, so 0x00010000 is fine. Also, I use IdeFix, which doesn't care about maxtransfer settings (0x00010000 also works without IdeFix).

Originally Posted by alexh

If you are using IDE you should use 0x1FE00 or lower

0x00010000 is lower than 0x0001FE00

[alexh]

Some IDE devices and CF cards seem to have been designed around DOS/Windows which by default only issues ATA commands which use 7-bits of the sector count field (perhaps legacy signed 8-bit?) i.e. a MAX TRANS of 0xFE00

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by alexh

Some IDE devices and CF cards seem to have been designed around DOS/Windows which by default only issues ATA commands which use 7-bits of the sector count field (perhaps legacy signed 8-bit?) i.e. a MAX TRANS of 0xFE00

Although I've tried it, that isn't the problem, either. My HD is a 40GB drive which I bought new in 2005, so it's pretty unlikely that those old limitations still apply. I don't think that this is a simple max transfer problem at all

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by mr_a500

This could be early signs of hard drive death. I too had a 40Gb drive, bought new in 2005 and it died suddenly without warning. That drive was replacement for a 10Gb drive, bought new in 2003, which died after months of clonking noises and checksum errors. Modern hard drives are absolute crap!

To be honest, I don't think that that is the problem, either The drive doesn't make strange noises, but...

Originally Posted by mr_a500

I suggest you try to back up everything, just to be sure.

... this is always good advice

Originally Posted by mr_a500

Edit: Oh, I just read that you said it happens in the same block. I vaguely recall a method for marking bad blocks so the filesystem doesn't use them, but I can't remember exact details. Maybe somebody with better memory can explain.

Hehe, I don't think the block is actually bad: After deleting some files the checksum error pops up, then after a reboot I can delete those same files, but when I try to delete more the checksum error pops up again. I think that marking the block as bad will only move the problem to another block, and, it will probably need a reformat of the partition.

[rare_j]

I've seen topics over at amiga.org where people say not to use an SFS partition for your temporary internet files. They say the large number of writes contributes to some sort of corruption.

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthre...martfilesystem

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by rare_j

I've seen topics over at amiga.org where people say not to use an SFS partition for your temporary internet files. They say the large number of writes contributes to some sort of corruption.

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthre...martfilesystem

Thanks

This is indeed what seems to be the problem. All this only started after writing a large number of files to the partition. It's very probable that SFS has bugs which cause some problems, because it's still in BETA stage Am I now doomed to use FFS if I want reliability? Oh no

[Photon]

There's also PFS.

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by Photon

There's also PFS.

Yes, perhaps I'll have a look at that. SFS is just not in a very usable state right now, and can cause errors by just writing a few files to disk Hopefully someone will finish it someday, because it needs to be rescued from it's awful beta state.

[Bloodwych]

Have you ever thought of trying SFS v184 (older version with the bonus of SCSI-direct 8GB support built in - double the usable size of your drive). I've never heard of anyone complain about it? It was the one originally developed before a new developer took over. SFS has always been beta however, so no guarantees.

Or a more recent (than v184) but older version of SFS someone on this board might be able to recommend as trouble free.

Another option is using some of the free SCSI patches available and a FFS 64-bit alternative. The upside to this is you might be able to use all of your hard drive. I'm adding the required files to do this to the next ClassicWB release, but I can zip them up for you and place them in the zone.

[Thorham]

An older version, eh? Couldn't hurt to try, although I can use the whole drive (40GB) because of IdeFix with SFS. I'll take it under consideration .

[Bloodwych]

I didn't read you were using IDE-fix - the most popular large drive solution.

Can't really think what else to try, apart from the 64bit FFS versions.

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by Bloodwych

I didn't read you were using IDE-fix - the most popular large drive solution.

No wonder, It works out of the box

Originally Posted by Bloodwych

Can't really think what else to try, apart from the 64bit FFS versions.

Sounds good, too, but I sure hope it isn't BETA software...

[Bloodwych]

It's the one from here, but you have to patch them first to remove, *gasp*, the beta alert:

http://os.amigaworld.de/index.php?lang=en&page=37

You might end up going back to this thread, where people suggest sticking to 3.5/9 and FFS:

http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=34493

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by Bloodwych

It's the one from here:

http://os.amigaworld.de/index.php?lang=en&page=37

Nice page, thanks But... it says 3.1 and I have 3.0. Does the FFS from 3.1 actually work with 3.0? As far as I know the differences between 3.0 and 3.1 are not that big (could be wrong).

Originally Posted by Bloodwych

You might end up going back to this thread, where people suggest sticking to 3.5/9 and FFS:

http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=34493

I had almost forgotten about that thread. I think I'll stick to WB3.0 for now and try to solve the filesystem issues I have with the patches you've recomended.

Thanks

[Bloodwych]

Well, you have two options then - an older SFS version that someone can vouch for.

OR - the patched files I'll put in the zone for you. Yes, they even work in Workbench 2.0 as pointed out by the great Thomas himself (google translated link, original in German):

http://translate.google.co.uk/transl...hdd/index.html

I think the patched FFS can work with IDE-fix, you don't have to use the patched SCSI-device I've put in the pack, but someone might have to confirm that.

This is the method I'll be using for the new ClassicWB packs, which use Workbench 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1.

[Thorham]

Bloodwych, thank you very much I've downloaded the archive you've uploaded and I'll check out an older version of SFS. If that doesn't solve my troubles, then nothing will (apart from PFS, perhaps).

[Bamiga2002]

I can still recommend PFS, it's been working on my HD's great for years now