View Single Post
  #8   (View Single Post)  
Old 2nd February 2017
hulten hulten is offline
Port Guard
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 25
Thumbs up

Formatting was much faster (less than a minute) for the ffs compared with fat32 (more than an hour). This is surprising because you mentioned that every filesystem needs this extra stuff like lists of free space which would take time to put on the disk.

The result
Code:
# disklabel sd0
# /dev/rsd0c:
...
16 partitions:
#                size           offset  fstype [fsize bsize  cpg]
  c:       7814037167                0  unused                   
  d:       4668308928       3145728064  4.2BSD   8192 65536    1 
  i:       3145728000               64   MSDOS                   
# mount
...
/dev/sd0d on /mnt/sd0d type ffs (local)
/dev/sd0i on /mnt/sd0i type msdos (local)
# df -h /mnt/*
Filesystem     Size    Used   Avail Capacity  Mounted on
/dev/sd0d      2.2T    8.0K    2.0T     0%    /mnt/sd0d
/dev/sd0i      1.5T    8.0K    1.5T     0%    /mnt/sd0i
Quite some overhead (0.2 TiB) for the FFS.

Of course the total does not add to 4 TiB but rather something like 4 TB, because hard disk vendors use base 10 (or, alternatively, they are bastards).

As mount(8) does not show it is FFS2 and the next thing I saw was that I have "2.0T" available on the FFS filesystem, I thought it was FFS, but I guess it is FFS2.
Reply With Quote