Resizing an NTFS partition........
alan at linuxholdings.co.za
Sun Apr 30 19:58:30 UTC 2006
On Sunday 30 April 2006 03:56, Joe Malin wrote:
> Well, at the risk of sounding like a complete n00b, I am puzzled by
> the statement
> "The major problem with NTFS is not it's inodes, but it's journal
> -data added to it gets out of sync with what's on the disk (for
> reasons that I've never understood and can find no docs on
> either.Maybe the NTFS driver developers have the same problem). "
Oops. I left out the qualifier. It should read something like this:
"The major problem the developers writing an NTFS driver for Unix find
is the journal..."
As I understand it, no-one outside MS really knows how to get data
into the file system and still keep everything properly in sync.
Hence the usual result of writing to NTFS seems to work for about a
> I also thought that this out-of-sync problem occurred in Unix
> filesystem as well, which was one of the reasons you didn't want to
> shut down a Unix box by turning the power off.
That's due to in-memory disk buffers not getting a chance to be
written to disk. The usual workaround in the old days was to run
'sync' three times before doing something drastic
> *And*, I thought that NTFS had fixed this, which is why chkdsk
> isn't usually needed.
> Can anyone set me straight on this?
I'll say this for MS - NTFS is way superior and more stable than any
FAT version, it survives even hitting the big red button at any old
random time. I've never had an NTFS crash yet (but did manage to
wreak one with a misguided grub-install)
If only you and dead people understand hex,
how many people understand hex?
alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za
+27 82, double three seven, one nine three five
More information about the ubuntu-users