Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Just how do they differ in their working or storing of files?
People have been saying Ex-FAT is a better file system, and not to use NTFS so much. But how do they differ in actual working. Can anyone explain?
One very important difference comes about if you use the EFS "Encrypted" attribute (EFS stands for Encrypting File System ).
EFS is transparent. You don't see it. Files are encrypted on the disk, but are automatically decrypted when you access them.
for more media that needs to move around, FAT is usually more handy because NTFS has security attributes that get tied to the local computer by default.
exFAT does (better) which NTFS doesn't which is useful when using it for more removable mass storage .
difference between FAT32 , NTFS and EX-FAT
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Just for self education I decided to implement "hello world" distributed file system. The simplest one. And decide to read about theory under this subject.
But... when I asking google about this it shows answers like "how to configure hdfs" or "how to set distributed fs on windows" what is not what I interested in...
Could someone please point me on some good articles or books on this subject.
Thanks a lot!
Well, if you really decided to implement such a file system, you must start with distributed systems. I recommend reading the Tanenbaum reference book http://www.distributed-systems.net/index.php?id=distributed-systems-principles-and-paradigms
Careful, the subject is really complex and distributed systems are all but simple to implement.
If you want to have a look to some already implemented distributed file systems, you may have a look to GFS/GFS2 (from RedHat). You may also have a look to ocfs2 from oracle.
You may also have a look to gluster https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/GlusterFS
You may also be able to find some white papers on the google file system (when it was still a university work).
The main problem of such distributed system is the failure detection (detect when a node crashes while writing on the file system => need to make sure there are no corruptions). There are multiple strategy, one may be to implement a journal which is protected by a distributed lock.
Another great (classical) problem is the 'split brain' problem, when the cluster is split in two groups because of a network failure (imagine a switch that is broken). Both groups 'think' that the other one is dead (they cannot communicate with it) but there is no way to make sure that the distant group is not writing data causing the data to diverge.
Hope you find what you want with all this.
Edit:
Now GFS is deprecated, redhat is using and developing 'Ceph'
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Apologies if this question seems rather trivial, but it's causing me some frustration.
I have a Redhat 5.3 installation, using nautilus-2.16.2-7.el5 that has two filesystems mounted. Under user1, when sending to the trash (pressing Del) on filesystem A we receive a confirmation dialogue box (do you want to etc). The behaviour is the same on filesystem B.
However, under user2, we receive the confirmation on Del on filesystem A, but NOT on filesystem B.
I've tried renaming the ~/.gconf/apps/nautilus folder and logging out/in to reset the Nautilus settings, but it's still behaving the same.
This is basically leading to users accidently deleting data, which isn't great!
Any advice would be appreciated folks!
D
Turns out that creating a new user profile and copying the settings corrected the problem (even though there was nothing filesystem specific in the gconf file).
cp /home/new_username/.gconf/apps/nautilus/preferences/%gconf.xml /home/username/.gconf/apps/nautilus/preferences/
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I have this file, and I have absolutely no idea what kind of file it is.
When I open it in Notepad++ it reads as
ð X döS
or
(source: gyazo.com)
How can I figure out what language this is?
Looks like that http://patch.us.wizard101.com:12500/ returns some sort of patch file for a game client. Chances are there is some api calls you are missing that tell the server what file to generate and return. But since only game clients need to directly call that file I would delete it and chalk it up to a broken client.
Either that or the site's download handler is broken and is giving a garbage file.
There's no clear answer, because you can't really. You can do some research on the encoding, or see if you can piece it together depending on the file's origin.
This program will test against common file types to see if it can be opened with success: http://download.cnet.com/TrlD-File-Identifier-for-NET/3000-2248_4-10442461.html
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I was wondering if there was anyway to effectively write out in a readable formate the file structure of a drive. So what I mean by this is if it can write out a result simmilar to...
C:/
File here
Another file here
Sub file here
Another file here
So sorta like that. I don't know what it is called but if there is something that does that then that would be great!! Even better if it was possable to do in batch (dosnt matter either way tho) Thanks :)
Open the command prompt in windows. Write:
tree
if you want options write tree /?
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 11 months ago.
Improve this question
I have recently encountered an embedded system with IDE drives that are FAT32 but have >4gb files. It appears to do this by setting the file size in the 32byte directory entry to how many bytes the final cluster uses - instead of being the actual file size. This allows the the files to have arbitrary FAT chains. The downside is the only way to know the file sizes are to stream through the chains, which are enormous.
I have never seen this before. Is this a known standard or variation and does anything on windows or linux support it?
Are there any 'quirky' FAT32 modifications that are more standard that allow files greater than 4GB?
Probably exFAT
This I think is a complete hack.
I've implemented FAT32 and I've never seen or heard of anything like this. I will be very surprised if there is any support anywhere for this.