On 1/03/2016 3:13 p.m., Barry wrote:
Probably a very basic question but it has me puzzled????I have copied a directory with a dozen or so subdirectories and 4000+ files from an Ext3 filesystem to a Dos (fat32) filesystem on another drive. I then checked the properties of each and found that the number of files and of sub-directories on each is identical, but the sizes in MiB differs greatly, the dos one being over 5 times the size of the Ext3 one. Is this because of the differing filesystems , or do I have to now compare the individual files?
Hm, over 5 times the size... that's a lot... But in principle both ext3 and DOS / FAT allocate disk space only in multiples of their respective block size, so that any file not fitting smoothly into a whole number of blocks will occupy a certain number of full blocks, plus one less than full block. If you have many small files (in the order of up to only a few blocks each) you lose a greater percentage of space due to this.
Now the block sizes for ext3 and FAT are not fixed - they are configurable within a certain range on creation of the file system, from memory somewhere between 1 and 4 KiB.
If your FAT (DOS) FS has larger blocks than the ext3 then it will be less efficient on average for small files. You won't notice this unless you have a large number of small files, though...
Does that sufficiently explain the observed effect, or is there more to it? Kind regards, Helmut.
<<attachment: Helmut_Walle.vcf>>
_______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.canterbury.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
