In a message of 06-26-1996, BENJAMIN MOSER wrote re: large HD
BM>  I am anti-HPFS, mainly because most of what I run is dos/win31
BM>  and my tape backup units are native dos/win31 and work [poorly|not at
BM>  all] in immitation OS2 DOS.  
Not to start a religious war or anything, but DOS and Windows 
programs run just fine from an hpfs partition -- but only from 
OS/2 virtual machines so that OS/2 can control access to the file
system.  DOS and Windows programs on an hpfs partition can still 
only use 8.3 filenames, but they do benefit from the 512-byte 
allocation units hpfs uses.
You really should invest in a native OS/2 backup program.  I hope
you're currently using something to extract and save the OS/2 
extended attributes when you use your dos/win3 backup stuff 
because otherwise they will be lost and you will not be able to 
easily restore a bootable OS/2 partition from your backups.  It's
an accident waithing to happen...
BM>  I am not 100% techie, but I believe that
BM>  with HPFS, a cluster is always 512 byte so there is no tradeoff to the
BM>  partition size (at least for cluster size) as there is for dos -- where
BM>  the bigger the partition the bigger the cluster size.
Hpfs uses 512-byte allocation units up to the maximum partition
size supported:  64GB.
 * KWQ/2 1.2i * Internet: jdt@edsi.org
--- OS/2 Warp\FastEcho\FD\ProBoard
(1:139/655)
---------------