Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #3710 > unrolled thread

[CM] Is HFS+ still a viable file system?

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  [CM] Is HFS+ still a viable file system? RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-06-16 16:17 +0000
    Re: [CM] Is HFS+ still a viable file system? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-16 17:50 -0700

#3710 — [CM] Is HFS+ still a viable file system?

From the «It's got a plus, so that's good» department:
Title: HFS+ bit rot
Author: Thom Holwerda
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:03:23 -0400
Link: http://osnews.com/story/27777/HFS_bit_rot

HFS+ lost a total of 28 files over the course of 6 years. Most of the
corrupted files are completely unreadable. The JPEGs typically decode
partially, up to the point of failure. So if you're lucky, you may get most
of the image except the bottom part. The raw .CR2 files usually turn out to
be totally unreadable: either completely black or having a large color
overlay on significant portions of the photo. Most of these shots are not so
important, but a handful of them are. One of the CR2 files in particular, is
a very good picture of my son when he was a baby. I printed and framed that
photo, so I am glad that I did not lose the original. If you're keeping all
your files and backups on HFS+ volumes, you're doing it wrong. HFS+ is a
weird vestigial pre-OS X leftover that, for some reason, Apple just does not
replace. Apple tends to be relentless when it comes to moving on from past
code, but HFS+ just refuses to die. As John Siracusa, long-time critic of
HFS+, stated way back in 2011: I would have certainly welcomed ZFS with open
arms, but I was equally confident that Apple could create its own file system
suited to its particular needs. That confidence remains, but the ZFS
distraction may have added years to the timetable. Three years later, and
still nothing, and with Yosemite also shipping with HFS+, it'll take another
1-2 years before we possibly see a new, modern, non-crappy filesystem for OS
X. Decades from now, books will be written about this saga.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#3718

On 2014-06-16 16:17:50 +0000, RS Wood said:

> From the «It's got a plus, so that's good» department:
> Title: HFS+ bit rot
> Author: Thom Holwerda
> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:03:23 -0400
> Link: http://osnews.com/story/27777/HFS_bit_rot
> 
> HFS+ lost a total of 28 files over the course of 6 years. Most of the
> corrupted files are completely unreadable. The JPEGs typically decode
> partially, up to the point of failure. So if you're lucky, you may get most
> of the image except the bottom part. The raw .CR2 files usually turn out to
> be totally unreadable: either completely black or having a large color
> overlay on significant portions of the photo. Most of these shots are not so
> important, but a handful of them are. One of the CR2 files in particular, is
> a very good picture of my son when he was a baby. I printed and framed that
> photo, so I am glad that I did not lose the original. If you're keeping all
> your files and backups on HFS+ volumes, you're doing it wrong. HFS+ is a
> weird vestigial pre-OS X leftover that, for some reason, Apple just does not
> replace. Apple tends to be relentless when it comes to moving on from past
> code, but HFS+ just refuses to die. As John Siracusa, long-time critic of
> HFS+, stated way back in 2011: I would have certainly welcomed ZFS with open
> arms, but I was equally confident that Apple could create its own file system
> suited to its particular needs. That confidence remains, but the ZFS
> distraction may have added years to the timetable. Three years later, and
> still nothing, and with Yosemite also shipping with HFS+, it'll take another
> 1-2 years before we possibly see a new, modern, non-crappy filesystem for OS
> X. Decades from now, books will be written about this saga.

The only production file system that I am aware of that is immune to 
bit rot is ZFS with either copies=>1 or zraid.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web