English Amiga Board Amiga Lore


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Support > support.Apps

View Poll Results: pfs or sfs
pfs 6 24.00%
sfs 12 48.00%
uh 7 28.00%
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 27 February 2003, 00:00   #1
oldpx
 
Posts: n/a
pfs or sfs

I have to decide.
simple
 
AdSense AdSense  
Old 27 February 2003, 00:10   #2
woody57
Registered User
woody57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Manchester
Age: 95
Posts: 801
WOTS IT MEAN PLEASE !

had to vote uh as maybe others will get an explanation of wot SFS - PFS stands for ??????????
woody57 is offline  
Old 27 February 2003, 00:32   #3
oldpx
 
Posts: n/a
smart file system
professional file system

they are fast file sytem replacements

PLEASE only vote if you know what you're doing. I'm about to use either on a 20gig'er.

woodshed, you've chosen the right one
 
Old 27 February 2003, 07:13   #4
Drake1009
Registered User
Drake1009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Denmark
Posts: 2,284
I've looked into SFS but not the other one. SFS looked promising but never got around to trying it. So my vote has been cast on UH
Drake1009 is offline  
Old 27 February 2003, 09:01   #5
Echo
Registered User
Echo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: South-West Wales
Posts: 382
Voted for SFS, only because it's definately better than FFS. I haven't checked out PFS.

Getting some crashes on boot, but that could well be related to something completely different. My hardware is feeling its age, lol.
Echo is offline  
Old 27 February 2003, 13:21   #6
Severin
Registered User
Severin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Gloucester / UK
Posts: 700
Send a message via ICQ to Severin
I voted sfs - bet that was a surprise

I used pfs (early V4) for 3 months and got fed up with having a trashed partition every few weeks

the only technical advantage of pfs is the 199 file limit to it's recovery drawer, where sfs only gives you 50 files.

I've been using sfs for 18 months, I've had 1 trashed partition (that was my fault), I'm using it on the following drives:

seagate IDE 12Gb as a single partition
seagate SCSI 4Gb as a single partition (for iso's)
Fujitsu SCSI 18Gb, 6 partitions (3 x 4Gb, 1Gb for sys:, 2 x 2.5Gb)
Fujitsu IDE 10Gb, 4 partitions (1 is 7.5Gb)

The only 'niggle' I had was having to mount the partitions crossing or over the 4 gig limit from dos drivers before OS3.9BB2 came out...
Severin is offline  
Old 01 March 2003, 14:49   #7
maddog
Registered User
maddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: .au
Posts: 60
SFS!

Wasn't PFS renamed to AFS when it went commercial or something like that?

I used PFS on many floppy disks and occasionally lost the disk when a track had a read/write error.

I used SFS on my HD for several years. My only complaints are that there is (was?) no undelete command supporting SFS and Settlers would not save games to the partition
maddog is offline  
Old 01 March 2003, 15:09   #8
Echo
Registered User
Echo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: South-West Wales
Posts: 382
Hmm, my occasional crash on boot must be related to something else then. I have so much in my startup-sequence it'd be virtually impossible to find the rogue app, if any, which is causing it.

The software failure is 8000 0003 if that provides any usefulness.

It mostly happens soon after I've switched the Amiga on. Couple of warm reboots later, it's stable.
Echo is offline  
Old 06 March 2003, 02:24   #9
oldpx
 
Posts: n/a
SFS won the poll but not my heart

-Booted into 3.1
-Noticed that the 18.5gb partition was shown as 2gb (bad) but percent of the space filled was right (good)
-Started filling the drive with ~170mb files. After reaching the 2gb boundary, filesystem allowed me to continue and reseted the available space to 4gb but this is improper and not good.
-Returned to os3.9, immediateley noticed copying a ~170mb file was impossible, HD light stayed lit for minutes and nothing happened. It did not crash
-I could cancel the copy and then copied some small files >1mb to check the reaction of my os3.1 system
-Booted into os3.1. System refused to detect my partition after files were copied on in under os.39. I assume this might not have happened if I hadn't exceeded 2gb but I WILL exceed that amount and WILL expect to use the HD under 3.1 AND 3.9

I also wasn't able to use file names longer than ~40 characters.

Now I'll test PFS

All my data is backed up so if you have any recommendations on checking a file system's possibilities, I can do them.
 
Old 06 March 2003, 02:52   #10
oldpx
 
Posts: n/a
-Deleted the big files under 3.1
-Booted 3.9 and copied ~3mb of files to the 18.5G partition
-Drive did not display under 3.1

result: sfs+os3.1 combination doesn't display drives that are just _modified_ under 3.9 probably regardless of the size.
 
Old 06 March 2003, 13:04   #11
Severin
Registered User
Severin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Gloucester / UK
Posts: 700
Send a message via ICQ to Severin
What version of l:smartfilesystem are you using? I have 1.195 (20/05/2002)...

your 40 char limit under 3.1 is probably down to software, alot of older programs can't deal with long filenames, they just don't allocate enough memory to hold the string

I regularly copy entire cd iso's (upto 720Mb) about with no problems

If your booting into 3.1(or anything less than 3.9bb2) you will need a dosdriver to mount any partition on or after the 4 gig limit.

as for the sizes being displayed incorrectly, that is a limitation (bug) in workbench, Dopus MII here reports one of my drives as 1.8G used, 2.8G free, 680.7M total (it's really a 12G partition)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	pic00.jpg
Views:	265
Size:	35.6 KB
ID:	4821  
Severin is offline  
Old 06 March 2003, 13:30   #12
oldpx
 
Posts: n/a
Nice screenie. What program do you use to get this info screen?

I couldn't get pass 40 char even on 3.9. Trying to rename one, my workbench screen blinked indicating the name couldn't be any longer.

I'll test PFS today, it I encounted worser problems I'll return to SFS. If things are better or just the same I'll keep my partitions just not to reformat them.
 
Old 06 March 2003, 14:06   #13
Echo
Registered User
Echo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: South-West Wales
Posts: 382
I don't know what you people do with your Amigas, but I find a 2gb drive plenty for all my utils and favourite hd game installs!

It's probably only 25% full at the moment.

For the video/iso stuff, I leave that to my PC which is far better and faster at handling large files.

p.s. I have the 40 char (if not less) limit also on SFS under WB 3.0. Even when renaming from the standard WB menu, so it's not a case of third party programs getting confused.
Echo is offline  
Old 07 March 2003, 15:59   #14
Severin
Registered User
Severin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Gloucester / UK
Posts: 700
Send a message via ICQ to Severin
Quote:
Originally posted by Burseg
Nice screenie. What program do you use to get this info screen?

I couldn't get pass 40 char even on 3.9. Trying to rename one, my workbench screen blinked indicating the name couldn't be any longer.
The screenie is from Directory Opus Magellan II

To get past the 40 char limit use 'wbctrl MNL=100' in your user-startup (wbctrl is on the 3.5/9 cd's), there is also a wbstartup program that does the same, but I can't remember it's name

Quote:
p.s. I have the 40 char (if not less) limit also on SFS under WB 3.0. Even when renaming from the standard WB menu, so it's not a case of third party programs getting confused.
WB3.0 has a limit of 31 chars iirc, sfs might be able to handle 100 char names but workbench can't

Try cli rename command...
Severin is offline  
Old 07 March 2003, 23:33   #15
Severin
Registered User
Severin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Gloucester / UK
Posts: 700
Send a message via ICQ to Severin
Quote:
Originally posted by Echo
I don't know what you people do with your Amigas, but I find a 2gb drive plenty for all my utils and favourite hd game installs!

It's probably only 25% full at the moment.

For the video/iso stuff, I leave that to my PC which is far better and faster at handling large files.
Well, I don't (WON'T) have a PC, I do everything on my miggie, I have 43,789Mb of harddrive space (18G,13G,10G,4G) 2 IDE and 2 SCSI...

I have 3G of games, 8Gb of mp3's, 2G each for work the gfx, 4G for internet and downloads, 4G for images, 4G for iso's and 1G for system.

I does get rather cluttered, but then not have a PC running winslows, I don't have to do a total format/re-install a couple of times a year. I have never had to re-install an amiga OS due to software problems, only when upgrading (hardrive or OS, and then it's only a copy all from old partition to new one), the only time I've had to was due to terminal harddrive failure
Severin is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
 


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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Check4GB difference between SFS and PFS-020ds Turran support.Hardware 16 12 May 2012 10:59
Strange problem with ClassicWB 3.9 on SFS or PFS boot partition Tarel78 project.ClassicWB 15 20 April 2012 07:56
Which is better SFS or PFS source support.Apps 23 19 August 2010 18:00
PFS 5.3 or PFS 5.1 CD with valid Key ?? ruliovega request.Apps 1 30 December 2005 23:54
Pfs/sfs/sms/pmt/abc/bbc/ddt/ici/b&q/bbq Jim support.Hardware 7 19 September 2002 18:07

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 07:29.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.18529 seconds with 13 queries