Followup to: <5.1.0.14.0.20020104104826.03a15978 _at_ mage.qualcomm.com>
By author: Vijay Kumar <jkumar _at_ qualcomm.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Using 28bit cluster numbers and 65536 cluster size I could go upto 16TB
> which is lot more than what I wanted. So right now I have no problem with
> the on-disk format of a fat partition. Nevertheless with hard drives prices
> going down dramatically it may not be too long before we hit the limit.
>
> Regards,
> - Vijay
>
That's Microsoft's problem -- that's a fundamental limit of the format
they defined. The fact that they defined it in the first place is
part of the problem (the only way you can make a FAT filesystem work
*well* is by loading the entire FAT into memory ahead of time, and
"FAT32" breaks that), instead of creating a more sensible
replacement.
(FWIW, the reason they used to justify FAT32 was "it would be too much
work to make DOS handle NTFS", as if those were the only options...)
-hpa
--
<hpa _at_ transmeta.com> at work, <hpa _at_ zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt <amsp _at_ zytor.com>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/