ipod madness
Gabriel Dragffy
dragffy at yandex.ru
Thu Apr 27 04:50:45 UTC 2006
You may well be correct, it is a long time since I got myself worried about
these things. If I remember correctly from NTFS (fairly similar to FAT32) if
you were using huge hard drives then you did need to increase the cluster
size to be able to use them, but hat only rally applied to server kind of
environments. As far as home computing went it was best to choose a cluster
size that more appropriately reflected the kind of files that would be
stored. I'll have a look on the net for some information, it would be good
to know if my assumptions are misplaced!
> I could be wrong, but I understood that the limitation on windows
> partitions and on block size choices is that the FAT cannot grow. Hence
> the total number of blocks in a partition is limited, and therefore blocks
> must be bigger (and less efficient) to use the available space in the
> partition.
>
> The improvement of FAT32 over FAT16 was a larger partition table that
> allowed for smaller blocks and/or larger partitions (if larger blocks are
> used).
More information about the kubuntu-users
mailing list