The negative effects are when you need to store large files, essentially the file needs to be broken up into smaller chunks, and so takes longer to store/retrieve. I don't think the size of your FAT table matters anymore, way back when it was limited and so you were limited by disk size vs cluster size vs FAT table size.
Or something like that. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:support-admin@;freenetproject.org]On Behalf Of Josh Steiner > Sent: 28 October 2002 14:38 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Re: [freenet-chat] slightly off topic: > fat32 methods of keeping my store folder size > > > good idea, hadnt thought about just making a freenet datastore > partition, what are the negative effects of using smaller cluster sizes? > (there must be some, otherwise they would default to 16 :) perhaps its > just addressing, if you have smaller clusters you have *more* clusters > and therefore have to address more clusters... if this is all, then it > should matter as i'd be having at most a partition of a gig or two for > freenet... > > i'm not sure i'm going to do this though since i dual boot to linux > about 50% of the time i use my computer, so i was planning on setting up > a node on my linux box that shares the same datastore... > > -joschi > > ___________________________________________________ > Josh .. Yoshi .. Joschi .. http://mp3.com/vitriolix > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >>>so (unfortunately) i am forced to use fat32 on my windows > machine where > >>>i run my freenet node... right now here is the size info: > >>> > >>>Size: 391 MB (410,077,960 bytes) > >>>Size on disk: 506 MB (531,529,728 bytes) > >>> > >>> > >>I would recommend putting the freenet datastore on a separate > >>partition if possible. Partition Magic (commercial software, but well > >>worth the money) can do this for you without destroying your existing > >>files. > >> > >>When formatting the new filesystem, try to give it as large a cluster > >>size as possible, and you will cut down on lost space. (Or format it > >>as NTFS, if that's an option). > >> > >> > > > >no, sorry. make the clusters as SMALL as possible, so the last > used cluster by a file is filled up more effectively. > >the clusters that do not fill completely contain the wasted space: > >cluster 256 bytes, data 64 bytes = 192 bytes wasted > >custer 4096 bytes, data 64 bytes = 4032 bytes wasted > > > >____________________________________________________________ > > > >The information transmitted is intended only for the person or > entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential > and/or privileged material. Any > >review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking > of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or > entities other than the intended > >recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please > contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >support mailing list > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > > > > > > > -- > ___________________________________________________ > Josh .. Yoshi .. Joschi .. http://mp3.com/vitriolix > > > > _______________________________________________ > support mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > _______________________________________________ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
