Re: cluster size
On 27 Jan 2002, at 8:09, vern at lvp.eastlink.ca wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kat" <gertie at PELL.NET>
> To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 2:04 AM
> Subject: Re: cluster size
>
>
> > On 26 Jan 2002, at 21:15, Dan Moyer wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Does anyone know how I can programmatically find out what is the minimum
> > > cluster size used on a drive? I'm under the impression that it can
> vary,
> > > since a small file (little bigger than a Kb) on one drive takes up 4096
> > > bytes, and the same file on another drive takes up 8192 bytes. Both
> drives
> > > indicate FAT32 from fdisk.
> >
> > I think Euman did a include to get all the drive stats.
> >
> > > And am I right in thinking that it is cluster size rather than simply
> file
> > > size that relates to how much of a drive is used up? In other words, if
> you
> > > have a whole bunch of small files, each actually takes up (at least) one
> > > cluster, so more of your drive may be used up than would seem so from
> just
> > > adding up file sizes?
> >
> > Correct. The dos 8.3 filename takes up one slot, 9.3 takes up one more
> > slot, and each 7chars over that will count as another filename slot too
> under
> > fat32.
> >
> > Kat
> >
> >
> One reason, I believe, is that the 1st FAT32 drive is the native drive and
> the second drive is a FAT32b partition (extended DOS and Logical Drive), the
But that is not what he said, he said 2nd drive. I have more than one drive in
all my computers.
Kat
> extra size being additional logical making, an unfortunate side effect of DOS'
> single sized cluster size, fortunately the solution is to install a Unix os
> and
> format cluster at 1024 :)
>
> >
>
>
>
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
