Shoutbox

ntfs is more likely to go down due to errors then fat32

the ntfs that XP uses  NTFS 3.1 has a major flaw in it which can result in files being allowed use of mft reserved space

this is bad as the mft can become corrupt

resulting in large data loss

in other words

Fat32s file table is alot safer then NTFS's master file table

quote:

---

Originally posted by squall_leonhart69r
ntfs is more likely to go down due to errors then fat32

the ntfs that XP uses  NTFS 3.1 has a major flaw in it which can result in files being allowed use of mft reserved space

this is bad as the mft can become corrupt

resulting in large data loss

in other words

Fat32s file table is alot safer then NTFS's master file table

---

Would you please stop spreading this rumour. There is NOTHING true about it and it is major and absolute NONSENSE...

its very much true

and its not a rumour

its a well documented flaw in the ntfs file system

and if you searched the msn help forums you'd find it yourself

sad to say this,. but your very wrong

i and many others have had this error and returning to Fat32 is the only way to fix it

its caused by a mass amount of files being transferred at once, and the way ntfs drives are handled by windows

the bug was introduced in Windows NT SP6 which became windows 2000 and has never been fixed

i suggest you keep your mouth clamped when you yourself haven't researched the bug, and don't transfer the amounts of data i do along my server and within my computer itself

if you want proof

how bout you search google
for

Chkdsk has discovered freespace marked as allocated within the master file table reserved space

and

chkdsk has discovered freespace marked as allocated within the master file table

there is many accounts of the bug, and you will be surprised at how many have blamed everything from windows. to norton systemworks all the way to Nvidia display drivers

the flaw itself lies within the file system and the way the operating system updates the volume bitmap,

which by the way. handles where all the freespace is reported along the drive

this error is not fixable within chkdsk, and even converting back to fat32 and then back to ntfs does not fix it as the error returns very quickly

some people have fixed it using windows update, and those are the lucky ones

i for one don't wish to risk my data becoz of a flaw in a file system that should have been fixed

and word has it that the WINFS has this flaw fixed,

i would suggest not using any file system which indexes all data in one single file as if that file is damaged.. which btw is VERY easy to do,

everything is lost

Fat32 atleast for me. is assured of repairing any errors reported

and one last time

if you get this ntfs and defrag

then you better hope to god that you don't use the windows defragmenter

as it moves files and data into the mft reserved space

once this happens

chkdsk reports that the Master file table os corrupt and begins removing indexes

the only way to fix this is to go back to Fat32 completely

i for one will not be using anying short of Winfs in the future, and even then once i have become certain that this bug is fixed

CookieRevised

i suggest you check up on your info before you post calling my post rumour and nonsense.. especially when you yourself haven't experienced the problem firsthand, and haven't bothered to research the problem itself

Like I said, the thing you're talking about is NONSENSE!!! There sure can be a small bug in the system, but NFTS is thousand times better, secure and reliable then FAT32 is... And FAT32 contains hundred times more bugs and malfunctions then NFTS.... research on that before claming FAT32 is better then NFTS!

Oh, and if chkdsk is reporting freespace as being marked, then this will NOT result in data loss at all, it only will result in some decreasing of free space. And furthermore, this problem is more persistent in FAT32 then in NFTS! And another thing, cross linked files is VERY common in a FAT32 system and this DOES cause data loss and damage. This problem almost doesn't exist in NFTS systems. And if that isn't enough, due to the way a FAT32 system works, it is VERY prone to errors when the system becomes unstable or hangs, again resulting in major data loss... Also a NFTS system has build-in backup system in the form of a log, for in the rare case that location data is lost, which allows for a transparent, automatically and quick recovery and garantees a consistent filesystem, unlike FAT32...... So before cleaming anything, get your facts strait...

i don't have to research,

i have first hand experience that Fat32 is better then ntfs

the problem happened when i copied all my data back after formatting

ie downloads.. music..

the bug itself lies in copying large amounts of mixed small and large files

for some reason it confuses the volume bitmap and it believes that theres not enough freespace so it allows space to use the mft

the problem is though, is that the mft doesn't properly get notified and doesn't shrink down properly, and instead reports it as an error

but, its when you defrag that it gets really bad becoz the files are moved into the space the mft expands into

and by doing this, the files are over written, by the mft, which doesn't know itself the files have been removed

this in turn causes corruption along the mft and you start getting corrupted indexes

Fat32 has been more stable for me, for as long as i've known it

sure it was less stable on older versions of windows. but seeing as windows ME and XP are both self repairing Operating systems
(with the health of the Windows file protection utility), many errors people talk about work themselves out

i have never had a problem with fat32 and they all started when i went to ntfs

so im just warning people about the problems you CAN face

so if you believe informing people about the problems they can face is nonsense.. then you are one of the monolithic goons that are trying to keep freespeech down, and preventing people knowing all the facts

THE FACTS ARE

NTFS is going to be soon outdated as the WINFS file system will soon become available via a windows update

the WINFS is already supported by windows xp as its not far off of ntfs except its more secure and this flaw and bug is fixed

and that the mft is going to be replaced by a more efficient system

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
reliable then FAT32 is

---

if thats so, why does Sourceforge say to Many Linux advacotes that wanna Dual-Boot with or using NTFS that its more safer to use Fat32?.. sure there are NTFS drivers out there to do it, but i myself have never dualbooted a PC using NTFS,  i have used NTFS, but i dont clasify it as being Reliable, .

ChkDsk is Crap, DOS is crap,  giuve me a LInux Terminal any day,

quote:

---

Originally posted by squall_leonhart69r

its very much true

and its not a rumour

its a well documented flaw in the ntfs file system

and if you searched the msn help forums you'd find it yourself

sad to say this,. but your very wrong

---

Pfft, take some advice from someone who know's what they're talking about and deals with NTFS file systems on a very large scale: There is nothing wrong with it.

Government servers even use NTFS these days? Why? Because it's perfectly compatible, contains security features, encryption and other things.

quote:

---

Originally posted by squall_leonhart69r

the only way to fix this is to go back to Fat32 completely

---

You've got to be kidding me -use a file system which doesn't support large files (max 4gb per file), has no security features or encryption, is full of bugs, doesn't support true unicode file names, no compression, recoverability, fault tolerance and a whole load of other things. Not to mention it is slower in accessing larger volumes (drives/partitions) containing lots of free space.

Stop spreading the fud!

[edit]

quote:

---

Originally posted by squall_leonhart69r
NTFS is going to be soon outdated as the WINFS file system will soon become available via a windows update

---

NTFS won't be outdated for reasons I specified above.

Some reading for you: http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,1995,1772619,00.asp

quote:

---

Originally posted by squall_leonhart69r
the WINFS is already supported by windows xp as its not far off of ntfs except its more secure and this flaw and bug is fixed

---

No, it's not already supported by Windows XP, and it is a lot different in the way it handles journalling/cataloging of files stored on the hard drive - it uses a databased approach (correct me if i'm wrong).

This flaw doesn't even exist apart from your own experiences and problems people have had.

[edit 2]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demz

if thats so, why does Sourceforge say to Many Linux advacotes that wanna Dual-Boot with or using NTFS that its more safer to use Fat32?.. sure there are NTFS drivers out there to do it, but i myself have never dualbooted a PC using NTFS,  i have used NTFS, but i dont clasify it as being Reliable, .

---

Because the fat32 file system (both read and write access) is supported in the linux kernel by default. To my knowledge only NTFS read support exists in the linux kernel and not in all linux operating systems.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demz
if thats so, why does Sourceforge say to Many Linux advacotes that wanna Dual-Boot with or using NTFS that its more safer to use Fat32?

---

That has nothing to do with the fact that NFTS wouldn't be safe or anything. (appart from those who believe and claim it is and thus spread this kind of nonsense). It has everything todo with compatibilty. When you have multiple types of OS's, the best thing todo, because of compatibilty reasons, is to make your first boot drive FAT32 (and small) as all PC OS's support this and are capable of booting from this.

and in response to your edit

READ THE POST PROPERLY

IT READS

Chkdsk has discovered freespace marked as allocated within the master file table reserved space

and

chkdsk has discovered freespace marked as allocated within the master file table

Which doesn't take away space for the machine as it couldn't use it anyway

what happens is that the mft cannot expand into this sector as freespace has been allocated to that portion of the mft

something i should have done is taken a screenshot of O&O defrag so i could show you that files had been moved for no reason into the mft reserved space zone

AND also, this space is meant to be locked

which means that space isn't being taken away

space is being added

but its not needed as i've got 32gbs of data on an 80gb drive

so theres no reason to put files in the mft zone

and also

i haven't had a crosslinked sector since windows 98

and even if i do, most files are backed up by system restore anyway so the minute one gets messed up,. its replaced by the automatic file protection within XP

cookie. you don't wanna go up against me when it comes to file systems and issues, coz i can't say without a doubt that Fat32 is not as much as a problem as you spin doctors put on it

heres my experience with ntfs

Chkdsk has found errors within the mft
repairing errors (errors never repaired, seems they can't be ( also a bug within ntfs))
Chkdsk has repaired the mft

reboot
chkdsk has discovered that freespace has been allocated in the area marked as mft reserved space
repairing the mft (never repaired)

after backing all my data up

which btw was to a ntfs drive

there was no problems

i backed up with the microsoft backup utility which backed up everything remarkly well (for a microsoft program)

i then restored everything onto Fat32 and ran chkdsk

chdsk has finished with no errors

reboot

chkdsk has finished with no errors

oh i thought lets see

* squall_leonhart69r flicks power off on psu
* squall_leonhart69r turns it back on

windows starts, tells me that windows wasn't shut down and needs to chk the dsk for inconsistancies

chkdsk has finished with no errors

so you see, in my personal experiance. with 5000 other pieved off users who also have the same error as me, Fat32 is the better operating system

Stability wise, performance wise (when considering ntfs has to update everyfile as its used which slows things down)

the hard disk i backed up to never got an error

i believe this is becoz the windows backup utility builds one solid image file and not move the files themselves

i then moved 4 folders containing around 4000 files to the drive and then started recieving the error on it

i formatted. errors gone

copied 2 different folders with dvd image files in them

no problem

i then copied my download folder which has files ranging from sizes 100kb to 100mb+

i recieve the error again

my conclusion is that the volume bitmap is very volatile, and can not handle a mix of large and small files being transferred to it at once.

i have sent and recieved mail from a contact at microsoft who also noted the same problem and informed me that i should return to Fat32 if i handle alot of files

so cookie

i don't have to research, i know how both file systems work

throught my investigation into the problem i learnt alot about ntfs metafiles and metatags

i learnt what each $file handled and what errors can occur in them

and have come to the conclusion

IF YOU ARE GOING TO USE THIS EXTERNAL DRIVE AS A BACKUP DRIVE OR STORE LARGE AMOUNTS OF SMALL AND LARGE DATA ON IT

THE SUGGESTION FROM MICROSOFT ITSELF IS TO PARTITION IT SEVERAL WAYS AND FORMAT IT FAT32

Partition the drive with seagate disc wizard
as partition magic causes the drive to have to many logical blocks for some reason rendering the drive unbootable as such

either way its your choice

4kb clusters are the best becoz they prevent space wastage

partition magic will not allow alot of discs to be partitioned to fat32 at 4k but seagate discwizard does it well

i would suggest 4 125gb partitions allowing 4 new drives

eitherway

be sure you know all the risks before using ANY file system

don't listen to what just me an cookie have said

these days you can also create your disc to a raw partition and read and write to it like that

this is actually the most secure way of storing data as its not very easy to read raw file systems without having the required software

alot of networks use raw file systems to back up onto these days

true, but i never put much faith in NTFS , i know lots do boot from a NTFS  but i also hear lots of whinging why it dont work properly etc,  thus why sourceforge recommend dualbooting from Fat32,   but i have to say ..thinking NTFS is safe, it might be, but intill we got the word from Microsoft or any other official source  to say it isnt,  we can only have our own oppinions in whats safe an  whats not safe,