Re: Goodbye HFS.FST (crashed HD again)

[johnlb@primenet.com (John Bowling)]

In article <50uhup$buk@europa.frii.com>,
Randy Shackelford <shack@deimos.frii.com> wrote:
>In article <50tn3q$j7b@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>,
>John Bowling <johnlb@primenet.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm running a 520M on my gs, with 2 128K HFS partitions.  I haven't had
>>any problem.  When I feel that I need to optimize, I copy the data to
>>other partitions, erase the partition, and copy back.  I will usually use
>>the Orca shell compress utility to alphabetize the directories while it's
>>on a ProDOS partition (so the listing does not have to be alphabetized
>>every time by HFS -- one of the reasons it's slower than ProDOS).
>
>Um, HFS uses a B tree for directories, not a linked structure like ProDOS.
>So the directory is always alphabetical. Unless GS/OS does it differently
>from a Mac that is.

I have noticed a speed increase in getting a directory listing on an HFS
drive after assuring that files are placed on the drive in alpha order.
This shows up when doing a listing in the Orca shell as well as in a
desktop program which calls standard file selection routines.
If a B tree is used, it should make no difference where things are at
when the tree is traversed.  The difference is more noticable with more
files in the directory, which would lead to an assumption of some form
of sort routine being used.  Then, there may also be problem with the
sort used by the standard file selection routines in GS/OS where if it
gets a list that is allreadly sorted it take the most time to sort it.
This would not effect listing in the shell where ProDOS listings are not
sorted.

John
 
--
--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--
- John Bowling          -- Shouldn't you be commuting by bicycle?
- johnlb@primenet.com   -- No, that's not a valid excuse!
--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--