Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Computer Learning -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PMS Witch who wrote (2453)	3/21/1999 1:23:00 PM
From: Steven Bowen	Respond to of 110648

"A related topic: FAT32" I stole this from a link someone around here posted; "July 6, 1997 By Al Fasoldt Copyright © 1997, Al Fasoldt Every disk has a file allocation table, or FAT, that stores vital information on how files and folders are organized on the disk. Most PCs have a standard file allocation table on each hard drive. This is called FAT-16 because it uses 16 binary digits (bits) to encode all its information. FAT-16 file allocation tables cannot handle large drives well. On a 2-gigabyte drive that has a single partition, files are stored in large blocks of 32 kilobytes each. No matter how small a file is, it must take up 32K on that drive. This is not a big problem when storing large files, because the slack space (wasted disk space) is a small percentage of the file size. But the waste is almost incomprehensible if the disk holds a lot of small files such as shortcuts and icons; these files are usually quite small (a few hundred bytes, perhaps), yet each takes up take up 32K in storage. FAT-16 thereby wastes 32,468 bytes to store a single 300-byte shortcut. (32K is not 32,000 but 32,768.) A large file system with 1,000 files of less than 1,000 bytes—not an uncommon situation, I'm sure—would waste as much as 30 megabytes just in that category alone. Another problem: FAT-16 partitions cannot be larger than 2 (or 2.1) gigabytes. Disks larger than this size must be partitioned into smaller logical drive units. This is not much of a limitation for most of us, but it can cause problems in the handling of very large databases (in which single files could exceed 2 gigabytes) and in drive arrays where all available drive designators, such as C:, D: and so on, are used up. FAT-32 solves both problems. It uses 32-bit math to store information, and can therefore keep track of far more clusters. (The largest single partition under FAT-32 is 2 terabytes—2,000 gigabytes.) On "normal" large drives—a definition that will undoubtedly keep shifting upward—FAT-32 uses cluster sizes of 4K instead of FAT-16's 32K. FAT-32 maintains this 4K-cluster size for partitions up to 8 gigabytes. Windows 95B, also called OSR2, is the first operating system to support FAT-32. Most new PCs come with Win95B, but FAT-32 may not be turned on. If you have a recently manufactured PC, check to see whether you have Win95B by right clicking on My Computer and choosing Properties. Look for the version number of Windows under the word "System." Win95B's version number is 4.00.950 B. To see if your Win95B PC's C: drive already has FAT-32 enabled, open My Computer and right click on the C: icon. Choose Properties, and then look for the word "Type" under the disk label. Drives formatted for FAT-32 will have "Local Disk (FAT-32)" under the entry for the label."

To: PMS Witch who wrote (2453)	3/21/1999 3:31:00 PM
From: wily	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 110648

Steven and PW: Thanks for your answers. I do find this stuff interesting and I would like to learn more. I wonder why they couldn't have started with FAT 32 in the first place, and why they needed such large clusters if they were potentially so wasteful. Seems FAT 16 must have something still going for it though, since that is what you have to use for NT if you don't want to use NTFS (or maybe there is some other, legacy-type issue?). I'm reading now a basic, and many say classic text on computer architecture and design "Computer Organization and Design", by Henderson and Patterson. It's amazing how quickly the book takes you into instruction sets and low-level languages. Now I know what a bit is! Wish I had more time (and energy) for this. On another topic, this may be of interest to someone: I mistakenly erased one of my drives a while ago and thought there might be some way to recover the data (some of which was important to me). So, I asked around and someone told me of a DOS program called "unformat". I got a-hold of that but it wouldn't work since it was 16-bit and my drive was FAT 32 (or, I presume that was the reason). Then someone on the Dream thread recommended I check out "Lost and Found" by PowerQuest (the makers of Partition Magic). I did and I bought it and today I finally used it and it worked perfectly!! Quite amazing to see it run and do the job. The program costs about $50 for a single-user license (this restricts you to using it on only one computer: PowerQuest is known for being restrictive like this. I called the company and the lady I talked to said that I can use the same program (on floppy) on any drive as long as the drive I originally used the program on is installed in the same computer. Which is not really so bad -- but I'll believe it when I see it). There was one consequence of the job however: now I want to re-partition the disk that had the lost and recovered info, but I can't access 500MB of space on that disk -- which is exactly the amount of space that was in the erased drive. Gonna call PQ Monday. wily

To: PMS Witch who wrote (2453)	3/22/1999 12:23:00 PM
From: RJL	Respond to of 110648

Good post. It's one of my favorite topics, but probably the most difficult to explain. Fat 16, is the standard file system used. Windows NT uses it as a default, as does DOS, and Windows 95/98. It can use up to 32k per cluster which wastes a lot of file space. Example: If you have a 1k file, it will use up 32k of space regardless. That's why there's a lot of 'slack' space left on Fat 16 drives. Pros: The most common file system, good compatibility with most OS's and operating systems. Cons: Wastes a lot of space, partition limit of only 2Gb. Fat 32, which can be used on the later releases of Windows 95 and Windows 98 utilizes the cluster sizes more dynamically therefore leaving less 'slack' space as well as increasing file access times. Pros: Faster, more efficient disk usage, and allows for partition sizes above 2Gb. Cons: Not compatible with older file systems, and some older operating systems. For newer, home systems, I recommend using FAT32 if running Windows 95/98. With Windows NT, that's not possible, but most home users don't use NT...yet. Rich