64 bit filesystem

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
Will the 64 bit filesystem, like the one found in BeOS, be present in 10.4. I didn't heard about it for Panther.



Do a 64 bit filesystem a better thing for a 64 bit processor than a 32 bit processor or do it have no consequences?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Spartacus

    Will the 64 bit filesystem, like the one found in BeOS, be present in 10.4. I didn't heard about it for Panther.



    HFS+ already allows pretty large files, but there will be no new filesystem for Panther.



    Quote:

    Do a 64 bit filesystem a better thing for a 64 bit processor than a 32 bit processor or do it have no consequences?



    It doesn't matter.
  • Reply 2 of 14
    synsyn Posts: 329member
    as wmf stated, HFS+ has always been 64 bit...



    http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn1150.html
  • Reply 3 of 14
    He didn't state that, and HFS is not 64 bit.
  • Reply 4 of 14
    synsyn Posts: 329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by FotNS

    He didn't state that, and HFS is not 64 bit.



    it can handle files that are 2^63 bits in length, what else do you want?
  • Reply 5 of 14
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    HFS+ can have files up to 2^63 bytes, but a volume can only have 2^32 blocks. You really don't want blocks to be any bigger than 8KB (2^13), which means you could only support one 2^45 byte file. XFS and BFS allow much larger volumes and files IIRC.
  • Reply 6 of 14
    What are the technical low-level differences between all of these filesystems? This is one of the areas of computers that I don't really understand.
  • Reply 7 of 14
    baumanbauman Posts: 1,248member
    The operating system allocates disk space in what are called blocks, and it numbers each block. So, a file on your system tells which block(s) are occupied for a certain data file. Now, a filing system has a limit for the number of blocks it can identify, so for that reason, there is not a set size for each block. The trouble comes from very big hard drives, where the smallest block would be a sizable amount. (On a 500 GB Hard Drive, there would be 500,000,000,000*8 bits / 2^32 allocation blocks = 14 Bytes/block. On The old HFS, which was 16 bit, 500,000,000,000*8 bits / 2^16 allocation blocks = 953 KB/block. You can see how this could be a problem, but it really doesn't look like there would be that big of an advantage for a 64 bit allocation space.
  • Reply 8 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bauman

    The operating system allocates disk space in what are called blocks, and it numbers each block. So, a file on your system tells which block(s) are occupied for a certain data file. Now, a filing system has a limit for the number of blocks it can identify, so for that reason, there is not a set size for each block. The trouble comes from very big hard drives, where the smallest block would be a sizable amount. (On a 500 GB Hard Drive, there would be 500,000,000,000*8 bits / 2^32 allocation blocks = 14 Bytes/block. On The old HFS, which was 16 bit, 500,000,000,000*8 bits / 2^16 allocation blocks = 953 KB/block. You can see how this could be a problem, but it really doesn't look like there would be that big of an advantage for a 64 bit allocation space.



    How, assuming WMF is right, do XFS and BeOS allow bigger volumes? Is it just a bigger block size?
  • Reply 9 of 14
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Whisper

    How, assuming WMF is right, do XFS and BeOS allow bigger volumes? Is it just a bigger block size?



    Bigger blocks are bad. IIRC, XFS and BFS allow 2^64 blocks per volume.
  • Reply 10 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by wmf

    Bigger blocks are bad. IIRC, XFS and BFS allow 2^64 blocks per volume.



    So all filesystems use blocks and it's just a question of how many and how big?
  • Reply 11 of 14
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Whisper

    So all filesystems use blocks and it's just a question of how many and how big?



    Yes, but there are plenty of other factors that influence performance and reliability.
  • Reply 12 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by wmf

    Yes, but there are plenty of other factors that influence performance and reliability.



    Like what? Is there a good website I can go to that explains all of this so you don't have to type it out?
  • Reply 13 of 14
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Whisper

    Like what? Is there a good website I can go to that explains all of this so you don't have to type it out?



    I would recommend a good operating systems textbook, Dominic's book, and the XFS and JFS papers.



    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...96653?v=glance

    http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/pape...nix/index.html

    http://www-106.ibm.com/developerwork...ary/l-jfs.html
  • Reply 14 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by wmf

    I would recommend a good operating systems textbook, Dominic's book, and the XFS and JFS papers.



    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...96653?v=glance

    http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/pape...nix/index.html

    http://www-106.ibm.com/developerwork...ary/l-jfs.html




    Cool, thanks, I'll check them out
Sign In or Register to comment.