On 07/06/2011 04:39 PM, Darren New wrote:
> On 6/7/2011 8:29, Invisible wrote:
>> Oh, I see. So the FAT is just a map of free clusters?
>
> No. It's a file allocation table.

That's like saying "an open set is any set that's open". This is a 
useless description.

>> I don't think that impacts what I originally said though; you could still
>> cache it.
>
> It is cached. It's just that the cache gets written when you close a
> file after allocating space from the cache, because the system can't
> tell you're going to copy more files. Otherwirse, writing a big file
> would have to slopping back and forth between three different tracks for
> every granule written.

OK. But I still don't see why you can't cache the entire disk image on a 
typical modern PC. (Obviously there was a time when this would have been 
impractical.)

Post a reply to this message