Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info
[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: is this a known bub in repeater?

At 6:37 PM -0700 8/28/02, Clifford Novey wrote:
>Why?
>c
>
>>  much better just to upload the whole thing to the computer
>  > and reformat the disk and reload the samples...

er, yes, as I sent this off I realized that I didn't really explain why
but I was just too slack to call it back...

Basically, if you reformat the card and put the information
back on, you KNOW what you are getting -- a completely empty
FAT that has been filled with just your files.

If you use someone's defragmentation utility, you don't know
what you are getting.  Moreover, you are putting a lot of
read/write on the drive (which isn't really an issue for
solid state I suppose but is bad for hard drives).


At 6:46 PM -0700 8/28/02, Sean Echevarria wrote:
>If the CFC was close to being full, wouldn't writing the same files 
>back to the CFC cause defragmentation?

I believe that you intended to write "fragmentation".


>  You're assuming the writes will happen contiguously (not just 
>unfragmented but also nice and neat with no gaps between each file)? 
>It seems that if there are gaps between earlier files written, then 
>the last files to be written will have to be fragmented.

It's not a requirement of DOS format but in practice disk driver 
writers do in fact
allocate memory from a clean disk contiguously for that very reason.

      /t
-- 

http://loopNY.com ......................An "open loop": shows every 
Saturday!
http://whatGoes.com/submit .......................... submit to the 
calendar.