Bob Davidson said to Frank Ramsey on 02-18-98 19:23:
BD>Just so we don't get into Dale's bad books of "ner do wells", did you h
BD>to read my original posting? A prospective client was 
BD>informed by their outgoing administrator that yes, FAT32 
BD>will increase the amount of usable diskspace, but it will 
BD>also increase the amount of fragmentation.
BD>I'm not sure what he was using to base that assumption on, 
BD>but, the client would like to see (gasp) statistics.
BD>Do you know of anyone nerdy, er, I mean efficient enough to 
BD>have accumulated such info?
I'm not nerdy enough to have stats, but the concept makes sense... on large 
drives, FAT16 uses 32 kb clusters... on the same-sized (or larger) 
partitions, FAT32 uses 4 kb clusters.
That means that potentially, a files is broken up into 8 times as many 
pieces, which has the possibility of being stored in far more fragments. 
I'd suspect that file system 'smarts' will keep this from being 8x as much 
fragmentation, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if FAT32 systems got more 
defragmented.
(However, checking my FAT32 partition last night, it reported 1% 
fragmentation, so it can't be too dramatic).
_______________
Internet mail to: azisman@rogers.wave.ca
Win95 FAQ at: http://home.bc.rogers.wave.ca/azisman/faq95.htm
___
 * WR 1.31 # 126 * 
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------