Re: Extended partition types with MicroSloth products

Tom May (
Mon, 16 Oct 1995 10:57:11 -0700

>There's nothing inherently wrong with the FAT scheme for allocating
>disk sectors. Except that you can't have sparse files, and it's not so
>good for automatic undeletes, but neither of these is that important.
>The problems with the DOS filesystem reflect its age (and lack of
>engineering at Microsoft) more than anything else.

Perhaps my knowledge of FAT is dated (I learned the format in '81 or
so and maybe it has been improved for 16-bit cluster numbers as
opposed to 12-bit), but it keeps a single linked list of free clusters
-- files get clusters allocated from the front of the list, and
deleted files have their clusters returned to the front of the list.
This allocation scheme has the *inherently bad* affect of causing
major fragmentation. Under DOS, performance really starts to suck
when directories get fragmented, but I guess that's an implementation