old-www/HOWTO/UMSDOS-HOWTO-9.html

91 lines
3.3 KiB
HTML

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="SGML-Tools 1.0.9">
<TITLE>UMSDOS HOW-TO: UMSDOS-WHY-TO</TITLE>
<LINK HREF="UMSDOS-HOWTO-8.html" REL=previous>
<LINK HREF="UMSDOS-HOWTO.html#toc9" REL=contents>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
Next
<A HREF="UMSDOS-HOWTO-8.html">Previous</A>
<A HREF="UMSDOS-HOWTO.html#toc9">Contents</A>
<HR>
<H2><A NAME="s9">9. UMSDOS-WHY-TO</A></H2>
<P>Explaining how to operate or install a <EM>Umsdos</EM> system
is not enough. Most people are seeking some advises about
using <EM>Umsdos</EM> or not.
<P>
<P>
<H2><A NAME="ss9.1">9.1 The goal of <EM>Umsdos</EM></A>
</H2>
<P>The goal of <EM>Umsdos</EM> was to ease the installation of
<EM>Linux</EM>. An other goal was to ease its UN-installation.
The idea here was to promote the spreading of <EM>Linux</EM>.
Installing a new OS on a system is always troublesome. <EM>OS/2</EM>
for one will happily pollute your <CODE>C:</CODE> root with a bunch of
new directories. If you are clever like me, it will also erase
your config.sys and autoexec.bat files :-(
<P>The pseudo-root feature of <EM>Umsdos</EM> avoid this unwanted
invasion. <EM>Linux</EM> can be UN-install without side effect.
<P>
<H2><A NAME="ss9.2">9.2 Who needs it</A>
</H2>
<P>If you have a small hard drive, <EM>Umsdos</EM> will allow you
to share disk space between <EM>DOS</EM> and <EM>Linux</EM>. A disk
below 300 megs is in my opinion a small disk. This opinion
is based on the size of the different package available today.
One popular word processor may eat as much as 70 megabytes
if you select all features.
<P>If you have a larger drive, you may consider having a dedicated
<EM>Linux</EM> partition running the <EM>Ext2</EM> file-system. <EM>Ext2</EM>
use a smaller cluster size that <EM>DOS</EM> (1k in fact) so installing
many small files will eat less space than in a <EM>Umsdos</EM>
partition.
<P>
<H2><A NAME="ss9.3">9.3 Performance issue</A>
</H2>
<P>The following point apply to <EM>Umsdos</EM> compared with <EM>Ext2</EM>.
<P>
<UL>
<LI>Directory management is faster on <EM>Ext2</EM>. This come from
the overhead of the double directory structure of
<EM>Umsdos</EM>.</LI>
<LI>File access (reading and writing) is probably faster on
<EM>Umsdos</EM> than <EM>Ext2</EM>. This come from the simplicity
of the <EM>FAT</EM> file-system used by <EM>DOS</EM>.
Beware that this simplicity come with a cost:
<UL>
<LI>A maximum of around 65,000 files or clusters
per partitions. This also means that a 500
megabytes partition will use cluster 16k large.
In other word, a file containing a single byte
will use 16k of disk storage.</LI>
<LI>Everything is controlled by the <CODE>FAT</CODE> located
at the beginning of the hard drive. The <EM>DOS</EM>
file-system is probably more fragile because of this.</LI>
<LI>No provision to avoid fragmentation of files. A
<EM>Umsdos</EM> system will generally be used as
a single user workstation. In this case, this does
not matter much. As a multi-user engine, files
will get spread-ed all around the drive, lowering
file access performance.</LI>
</UL>
</LI>
<LI>Symbolic links are stored in normal file. If you intend
to have a lot of them, you will find that <EM>Umsdos</EM>
use quite a lot of disk space compared to <EM>Ext2</EM>.</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
Next
<A HREF="UMSDOS-HOWTO-8.html">Previous</A>
<A HREF="UMSDOS-HOWTO.html#toc9">Contents</A>
</BODY>
</HTML>