MessageI have a strong suspect that for the same amount of file work done, NTFS will do more disk writes then FAT.
Max
----- Original Message -----
From: Roddy, Mark
To: NT Developers Interest List
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 6:23 PM
Subject: [ntdev] Re: FAT32 bug in Win2K SP2?
NTFS is going to be much slower on directory and file access operations as it does a lot more work supporting features that are not available on FAT and most unix filesystems. READ/WRITE operations should be identical.
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@thermonicolet.com [mailto:xxxxx@thermonicolet.com]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 10:23 AM
To: NT Developers Interest List
Subject: [ntdev] Re: FAT32 bug in Win2K SP2?
Ok, now you’ve go my curiosity! Why is NTFS so much slower?
Dennis Merrill
Embedded Systems Engineer
Thermo Electron Corporation
Spectroscopy Division
-----Original Message-----
From: Maxim S. Shatskih [mailto:xxxxx@storagecraft.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 4:26 PM
To: NT Developers Interest List
Subject: [ntdev] Re: FAT32 bug in Win2K SP2?
Then the patched FASTFAT driver from IFS kit will appear (binary) for free download, which will support FAT32 > 32GB.
NTFS is SLOW. Plain and simple. It seems to be the only weak side of NT in tests which compares NT’s performance to UNIX performance.
On operation like copying a 32MB tree of 500 files to other directory, FAT32 is about twice faster then NTFS.
Data is not lost. There is NTFSDOS.
Max
----- Original Message -----
From: David J. Craig
To: NT Developers Interest List
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 1:12 AM
Subject: [ntdev] Re: FAT32 bug in Win2K SP2?
I have heard that Windows XP will not support FAT32 partition greater than 32GB if you use XP to format them. If you use DOS it will use them, but not create & format them. Bill’s M$ wants you to use NTFS so when data is lost, it is really lost.
----- Original Message -----
From: Phil Barila
To: NT Developers Interest List
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 2:47 PM
Subject: [ntdev] FAT32 bug in Win2K SP2?
I have *not* done an exhaustive analysis of this, but I think Windows 2000 SP2 may have a bug in the FAT32 code. Specifically, partitions larger than around 30GB won’t format, either unconditionally or quick. The specific error message is “Volume size is too big.” This happened on an ATA disk and a 1394 disk, on two systems. Both formatted NTFS fine, and the ATA disk formatted with Windows 98 fine. I haven’t got a fully functional 98 system to plug in the 1394 drive yet. Both systems are Dells, with different Intel CPUs and chipsets. Both have OS image that started from the Windows 2000 + SP2 CD shipped with the systems.
Anyone seen this? I had a really cheap, “media only, no support” MSDN subscription when I worked for Intel, so I don’t know how to go about submitting this as a sighting. Or maybe it’s a local config issue, that’s why I’m asking if anyone else has seen this…
Thanks,
Phil — You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@yoshimuni.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ntdev-$subst(‘Recip.MemberIDChar’)@lists.osr.com
You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@storagecraft.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ntdev-$subst(‘Recip.MemberIDChar’)@lists.osr.com
You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@thermonicolet.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ntdev-$subst(‘Recip.MemberIDChar’)@lists.osr.com
You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@stratus.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ntdev-$subst(‘Recip.MemberIDChar’)@lists.osr.com
You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@storagecraft.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ntdev-$subst(‘Recip.MemberIDChar’)@lists.osr.com
You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: $subst(‘Recip.EmailAddr’)
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ntdev-$subst(‘Recip.MemberIDChar’)@lists.osr.com