|
From: Andrew C. <cl...@gn...> - 2002-07-08 07:39:52
|
On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 03:24:23PM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote: > At 14:25 07/07/02, Andrew Clausen wrote: > >On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 06:07:56PM +0200, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote: > >> On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Andrew Clausen wrote: > >Also, I don't believe defragging requires any less knowledge of > >the FS than reconstruction. Aren't all references in NTFS done > >via attributes? > > Not knowledge but reconstructing an FS from a damaged state Who mentioned anything about "damaged state"? > >What about CHS/LBA addressing issues? It's often convenient to have > >a small boot partition at the start, etc. > > No, that has not existed as a restriction in neither Windows nor Linux as > of a few years now. Both OS quite happily will boot from arbitrary > positions on disk / inside a partition. (Obviously arbitrary being a > limited number but the limit is well beyond what todays harddrives can > manage). (IIRC the partition table allows booting of partitions up to 2TiB > into the disk.) Yeah, I guess you're right. > I have looked at this before. I admit I didn't actually understand how the > hell it was supposed to work (the block remapper is totally beyond me, but > I haven't spent too much time trying to figure out how it works) so take > the following with a pinch of salt... - I don't think it can ever work for > ntfs at all because of compressed files, encrypted files, file data stored > within the inode structure, and most importantly because of no support for > FIBMAP... Yeah... these things might be massage-able though, but it's not straight-forward, certainly. Cheers, Andrew |
