Re: FS and Cluster Size for Audio and Misc Data on USB HD? (Tech, Semi OT)

Sounds like you've answered all of your own questions.

http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/macosxcombinedupdate_10_3_6.html

http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/status.html.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/Windows/XP/all/reskit/en-us/Default.asp?url=/resources/documentation/Windows/XP/all/reskit/en-us/prkc_fil_lxty.asp

If I were doing this, I'd test the external drive with different filesystem
formats.
On XP, it's a no brainer: NTFS
Linux: Probably NTFS and Samba
MAC: No experience here.

As far as the cluster size requirements. Data type specific. You require big
and small. Check the table in the third link provided above.

Wayne
www.springdivers.com


"Veli-Pekka Tätilä" <vtatila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dmot1t$mdr$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi,
> Just got a 250 GB USB 2 based Lacie hard drive. Seems to work fine in XP,
> you just plug it in no driver installation needed. I'm planning to use
> this drive for storing various files including both small text and data
> files (e.g. sid, txt, cpp) as well as large audio and video stuff (flac,
> ogg, mpg etc...)
>
> My question is which file system and cluster size should I use when
> formatting the drive? Performance and cross-platform compatibility (OS X
> >= 10.3 , Linux 2.6) are my primary concerns in this order.
>
> The drive came pre-formatted in FAT32. However, I've read in various
> places that FAT32 does not support unicode names so a-umlauts (heavily
> used in Finnish) and other more exotic characters problably won't show up
> correctly in Linux or Mac. I know I shouldn't use such names but would
> like to if I can. Secondly, at least FAT16 wastes a huge amount of space
> as it has to raise the cluster size to fit in more data. Does FAT32 have
> this very same limitation? The capacity is 250 GB (where 1 GB is 1000 MB
> as far as HD manufacturers go).
>
> Lastly, FAT32 has a size limit of 4 GB per file, which might be an issue
> in some huge ISO files let alone wave or video. I have not hit the limit
> so far but there is a possibility that I might.
>
> As for what's good in NTFS, the unicode names, huge file sizes,
> self-healing and journaling come to mind very first. It also supports soft
> and hard links, compression and encryption but I have not found much use
> for these so far. I don't give a darn about security here, the assumption
> being that if someone gets physical access to the drive, then so be it
> <smile>. On the other hand, I've also read that NTFS has a bit more
> overhead in managing the files them selves and might offer only read-only
> access on LInux or OS X. IS it really true that no-one has managed to
> reverse-enginere NTFS to the extent of also writing new files on the disk?
> If such support exists, do you need special drivers in Linux or OS X?
>
> I'm somehow reluctant to go with FAT if I can avoid it, now that MS is
> gradually dropping the support for it, but it seems I might have to. Is
> FAT32 the only cross-platform HD file system that is also supported in
> Windows? I know Linux has got EXT3 and Reiser FS, among other things, but
> Macs and Windows machines won't be able to read those at least natively.
> My primary machines are WIndows only but I have friends who use Linux and
> OS X exclusively.
>
> Lastly, I'd like to enquire about the cluster size. I thought of going
> with the default 4k clusters initially as it seems a good compromise
> between size and performance. How big a difference does using 32 K
> clusters make in real-world sustained transfer rates? Plainly put, if I
> increase the cluster size does that mean a significant increase in the
> amount of simultaneous audio tracks as far as the HD goes?
>
> With 32 K clusters I know i would be wasting an awful lot of disk space
> when it comes to tiny files like SID music. With capacities of hundreds of
> gigs, a few hundred megs this way or that won't make much of a difference
> but I still like to optimize my disk space usage. This is probably an old
> habit from the DOS days. The first disk I used was 40 MB <shudders>.
>
> Any help, tips or links to further reading appreciated.
>
> --
> With kind regards Veli-Pekka Tätilä (vtatila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
> Accessibility, game music, synthesizers and programming:
> http://www.student.oulu.fi/~vtatila/
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • FS and Cluster Size for Audio and Misc Data on USB HD? (Tech, Semi OT)
    ... Linux 2.6) are my primary concerns in this order. ... The drive came pre-formatted in FAT32. ... raise the cluster size to fit in more data. ... still like to optimize my disk space usage. ...
    (rec.music.makers.synth)
  • Re: FAT32 v.s NTFS
    ... Size Limitations in NTFS and FAT File Systems ... Table 13.4 Default Cluster Sizes for Volumes with Windows XP Professional ... Volume Size FAT16 Cluster Size FAT32 Cluster Size NTFS Cluster Size ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.file_system)
  • Re: Fat32 vs NTFS ?
    ... > differences between FAT32 and NTFS, simply because of cluster size. ... > partitions from FAT32 partitions to solo or fewer NTFS partitions a few ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Fat32 vs NTFS ?
    ... differences between FAT32 and NTFS, simply because of cluster size. ... I converted several large drives and ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Defrag Problem
    ... Is it now safe to ... > change the cluster size using Partition Magic? ... I used Partition Magic to change from FAT32 to NTFS. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)