Change Folder Names ---> Decrease Free Space

[4th gen]

Settle a debate please people.
If I add a "0" to the front of some of the folders on my computer, will the amount of free space I have decrease?
I say it will because the file which Soulseek creates (which stores all of the folder and filenames which I'm sharing) will get bigger, Lamsey says it will stay the same (cos he's a fool).

Who's right? :)

[Lamsey]

[3rd gen noob] and remember, adding "0" to the front would use more storage space
[Lamsey] no it wouldn't noob, you noob
[3rd gen noob] aye it would
[3rd gen noob] of course it would use more space, you're storing one more character
[Lamsey] no it wouldn't noob, folder name'll be stored in the file allocation table, which is a set size
[3rd gen noob] my soulseek shared file would be bigger though
[3rd gen noob] haha! owned
[Lamsey] it won't make a difference however noob
[3rd gen noob] you've got to admit i've got you there lamsey :P
[3rd gen noob] doesn't matter, it still makes a difference
[3rd gen noob] ;)
[Lamsey] network data packets are a certain size, so there is going to be some padding because not all of every packet will be needed to transfer the data in your filelist... therefore it doesn't matter if you have an extra character because it'll just use up some padding in a packet
[3rd gen noob] i'm talking about on my computer though (local, not network)
[Lamsey] noob - local: my FAT explanation, network: my packets explanation
[Lamsey] j00 r teh pwn3d, face it
[3rd gen noob] i'm talking about the file which soulseek keeps containing my shared files
[3rd gen noob] so you're pwned
[3rd gen noob] hahahahahahahaha!
[Lamsey] nope, because of the way hard discs are used
[3rd gen noob] lol
[3rd gen noob] admit you're wrong biatch
[Lamsey] each file is written to sectors and there's never more than one file in a certain sector, so much like the packets problem, there won't be any wasted space
[Lamsey] this is why 'space on disk' is different from actual size



(non-relevant bits edited out (like teh adsim)).

[J'Pol]

When you say add a 0 to the folder what do you mean exactly ?

Do you mean the folder name or putting something in the folder.

Confused of Glasgow

[Proper Bo]

noob, just hit him again :01:

:lol:

[4th gen]

Originally posted by J'Pol@14 March 2004 - 23:43
When you say add a 0 to the folder what do you mean exactly ?

Do you mean the folder name or putting something in the folder.

Confused of Glasgow
Adding a "0" onto the front of the folder name. My simpsons episodes are labelled as:

Season 1
Season 2
etc...

They show up in chronological order in windows explorer, but not on soulseek

[4th gen]

[3rd gen noob] take a blank text file and put 1 million characters in it
[3rd gen noob] will it take up any storage space
[Lamsey] yes noob
[3rd gen noob] right, put 1 character in instead of 1 million, will it take up any space?
[Lamsey] yes noob
[3rd gen noob] so adding one character to an existing file will take up space?
[Lamsey] it will take up one hard disc sector

[4th gen]

Originally posted by Proper Bo, I tell thee@14 March 2004 - 23:47
noob, just hit him again :01:

:lol:
:lol:

Good thinking :01:

[h1]

In Windows, the size increases 32 bytes every 8 characters.

[scribblec]

U WANNA PLAY ROUGH ? OK ? SAY HELLO TO MY LITTLE FRIEND!!! :angry:

[Lamsey]

Originally posted by 4th gen@14 March 2004 - 23:49
[3rd gen noob] take a blank text file and put 1 million characters in it
[3rd gen noob] will it take up any storage space
[Lamsey] yes noob
[3rd gen noob] right, put 1 character in instead of 1 million, will it take up any space?
[Lamsey] yes noob
[3rd gen noob] so adding one character to an existing file will take up space?
[Lamsey] it will take up one hard disc sector
You seem to have omitted one of my replys noob.

[Lamsey] [3rd gen noob] so adding one character to an existing file will take up space? <-- depends on what&#39;s in the file already


Pathetic, really, selective quoting is just like admitting you are wrong
have a small penis
are crap at pool
:D

[J'Pol]

It is unlikely to take up more space. Given that your hdd is split into clusters and each piece of data uses the number of clusters it requires.

So if your cluster size is 4 and the file is 22 then it needs 6 clusters. 5 of which will be full and one half full. The space in the partly filled cluster (slack space) will not be available for anything else.

In most instances there will be slack space, one cluser will not be filled. So one additional ascii character should not really make that much difference. It seems logical that it would take up more space, but due to hdd structures and cluster sizes I think it unlikely. Obviously the smaller the cluster size, the more chance of it happening.

Please bear in mind I know feck all about these things and just made that up.

[4th gen]

Originally posted by Lamsey@14 March 2004 - 23:52
You seem to have omitted one of my replys noob.

[Lamsey] [3rd gen noob] so adding one character to an existing file will take up space? <-- depends on what&#39;s in the file already


Pathetic, really, selective quoting is just like admitting you are wrong
have a small penis
are crap at pool
:D
Your mother&#39;s a Peruvian hooker :lol:

Read haxor41789&#39;s reply ;)

[Lamsey]

Exactly right J&#39;Pol. I have been trying to drum this into the noob&#39;s skull.

[3rd gen noob] http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=104669&hl=
[3rd gen noob] hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
[3rd gen noob] i win
[3rd gen noob] 8 characters leads to 32 bytes more
[3rd gen noob] and there are more than 8 seasons which would need a "0" added
[Lamsey] http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showt...=0&#entry927378 (http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=104669&st=0&#entry927378)
[Lamsey] and not necessarily noob, remember the file sectors
[Lamsey] you won&#39;t be able to use that disc space anyway

I th8ink I&#39;ll have to drum harder. 16-beat time :rolleyes:

[Proper Bo]

Originally posted by Lamsey@15 March 2004 - 01:52

Pathetic, really, selective quoting is just like admitting you are wrong
have a small penis
are crap at pool
:D
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[4th gen]

Originally posted by Lamsey@14 March 2004 - 23:55
Exactly right J&#39;Pol. I have been trying to drum this into the noob&#39;s skull.

[3rd gen noob] http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=104669&hl=
[3rd gen noob] hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
[3rd gen noob] i win
[3rd gen noob] 8 characters leads to 32 bytes more
[3rd gen noob] and there are more than 8 seasons which would need a "0" added
[Lamsey] http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showt...=0&#entry927378 (http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=104669&st=0&#entry927378)
[Lamsey] and not necessarily noob, remember the file sectors
[Lamsey] you won&#39;t be able to use that disc space anyway

I th8ink I&#39;ll have to drum harder. 16-beat time :rolleyes:
Right then, if I edit 1000 folder&#39;s names then? ;)

[Lamsey]

Originally posted by 4th gen+14 March 2004 - 23:57--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (4th gen @ 14 March 2004 - 23:57)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Lamsey@14 March 2004 - 23:55
Exactly right J&#39;Pol. I have been trying to drum this into the noob&#39;s skull.

[3rd gen noob] http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=104669&hl=
[3rd gen noob] hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
[3rd gen noob] i win
[3rd gen noob] 8 characters leads to 32 bytes more
[3rd gen noob] and there are more than 8 seasons which would need a "0" added
[Lamsey] http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showt...=0&#entry927378 (http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=104669&st=0&#entry927378)
[Lamsey] and not necessarily noob, remember the file sectors
[Lamsey] you won&#39;t be able to use that disc space anyway

I th8ink I&#39;ll have to drum harder. 16-beat time :rolleyes:
Right then, if I edit 1000 folder&#39;s names then? ;) [/b][/quote]
Yeah, that&#39;s probable I guess. not sure of the exact numbers but it&#39;ll do.

However seing as I was telling you to change 9 folder names, that&#39;s irrelevant.

You still owe me a can of irn-bru from the last time you were completely wrong btw, I just remembered that. :D

[4th gen]

Originally posted by Lamsey@15 March 2004 - 00:00
Yeah, that&#39;s probable I guess. not sure of the exact numbers but it&#39;ll do.

However seing as I was telling you to change 9 folder names, that&#39;s irrelevant.

You still owe me a can of irn-bru from the last time you were completely wrong btw, I just remembered that. :D
You would admit though, that it&#39;s still possible that more disc space will be used just by changing 9 folder names?

And I bought you a morgan&#39;s and coke last week, didn&#39;t it?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by 4th gen+15 March 2004 - 01:57--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (4th gen @ 15 March 2004 - 01:57)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Lamsey@14 March 2004 - 23:55
Exactly right J&#39;Pol. I have been trying to drum this into the noob&#39;s skull.

[3rd gen noob] http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=104669&hl=
[3rd gen noob] hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
[3rd gen noob] i win
[3rd gen noob] 8 characters leads to 32 bytes more
[3rd gen noob] and there are more than 8 seasons which would need a "0" added
[Lamsey] http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showt...=0&#entry927378 (http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=104669&st=0&#entry927378)
[Lamsey] and not necessarily noob, remember the file sectors
[Lamsey] you won&#39;t be able to use that disc space anyway

I th8ink I&#39;ll have to drum harder. 16-beat time :rolleyes:
Right then, if I edit 1000 folder&#39;s names then? ;) [/b][/quote]
Personally I would go with my files being organised in the way I like and being easy on the eye, whilst affording me the most life enhancing PC experience.

I would not worry about a couple of partially filled clusters here and there. Maybe, many moons ago we worried about such things, but no longer.

Believe it or not, there is exactly the same amount of RAM in this PC as there was HD space in my first PC. I could in fact have loaded the whole content of my HD, swapfile and all, into active memory.

Now let it rest, enjoy yourself and live long in Possil.

[Lamsey]

Originally posted by 4th gen+15 March 2004 - 00:02--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (4th gen @ 15 March 2004 - 00:02)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Lamsey@15 March 2004 - 00:00
Yeah, that&#39;s probable I guess. not sure of the exact numbers but it&#39;ll do.

However seing as I was telling you to change 9 folder names, that&#39;s irrelevant.

You still owe me a can of irn-bru from the last time you were completely wrong btw, I just remembered that. :D
You would admit though, that it&#39;s still possible that more disc space will be used just by changing 9 folder names?

And I bought you a morgan&#39;s and coke last week, didn&#39;t it? [/b][/quote]
:o It was your bloody round you miser :o

[4play]

I might be wrong but it depends on how big the file is and what file system you are using.

if your using fat it should not increase as the file allocation table will just include the extra character in its allotted space. the file remains exactly the same.

if your using ntfs it will depend on the file size as it deals with small files in a different way from large files. of course folders are small so no it will not make a differnce.

I think lamsey is right. especailly about the pool playing.

[Lamsey]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@15 March 2004 - 00:03
Believe it or not, there is exactly the same amount of RAM in this PC as there was HD space in my first PC. I could in fact have loaded the whole content of my HD, swapfile and all, into active memory.
Same here, 1GB of RAM in this machine and a 1GB HD in our old P100.

It had 8MB of RAM, so I&#39;ve got 125 times as much RAM now... and my processor&#39;s at least 25 times faster...


Amazing the things that can happen in less than a decade :blink:

[bigboab]

All this for a rum and coke or an irn bru. :ph34r: If this had been for apple there would be some blood flowing by now. :)

[4th gen]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@15 March 2004 - 00:03
Personally I would go with my files being organised in the way I like and being easy on the eye, whilst affording me the most life enhancing PC experience.

I would not worry about a couple of partially filled clusters here and there. Maybe, many moons ago we worried about such things, but no longer.

Believe it or not, there is exactly the same amount of RAM in this PC as there was HD space in my first PC. I could in fact have loaded the whole content of my HD, swapfile and all, into active memory.

Now let it rest, enjoy yourself and live long in Possil.
As you&#39;re probably aware, the actual storage space isn&#39;t really the concern (I still have a small amount of disc space free). It&#39;s a matter of principle.

My first PC had a 1Gb HDD, at the moment I&#39;ve got 512MB of ram, so I could half fit my old HDD in ram...:)

Anyway, I think we can all agree on an end to the debate. Basically it&#39;s possible (but highly unlikely) that renaming 9 folders with one extra character would lead to a decrease in storage space on the drive.

p.s. I don&#39;t live in Possil :unsure:

[4th gen]

Originally posted by bigboab@15 March 2004 - 00:10
All this for a rum and coke or an irn bru. :ph34r: If this had been for apple there would be some blood flowing by now. :)
Or pear cider :x

[4th gen]

Originally posted by 4play@15 March 2004 - 00:09
I might be wrong but it depends on how big the file is and what file system you are using.

if your using fat it should not increase as the file allocation table will just include the extra character in its allotted space. the file remains exactly the same.

if your using ntfs it will depend on the file size as it deals with small files in a different way from large files. of course folders are small so no it will not make a differnce.

I think lamsey is right. especailly about the pool playing.
4play, I&#39;m not talking about windows itself, I&#39;m talking about soulseek. Soulseek keeps a text file containing all the folder and filenames you have shared.

[silent VI]

http://filesharingtalk.com/sigs/4play1.jpg

:drool: 2 best thing every a naked female surronded by eletronics :drool: where did ya get it?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Lamsey+15 March 2004 - 02:09--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lamsey @ 15 March 2004 - 02:09)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@15 March 2004 - 00:03
Believe it or not, there is exactly the same amount of RAM in this PC as there was HD space in my first PC. I could in fact have loaded the whole content of my HD, swapfile and all, into active memory.
Same here, 1GB of RAM in this machine and a 1GB HD in our old P100.

It had 8MB of RAM, so I&#39;ve got 125 times as much RAM now... and my processor&#39;s at least 25 times faster...


Amazing the things that can happen in less than a decade :blink: [/b][/quote]
Mine was a P90, but we ran it at 120. We were that mad and revolutionary. That was when I found out that the numbers were meaningless, only the architecture made any difference.

The number only reflected the speed at which the processor could safely be operated. As they got better at making them then the numbers got higher. The processors were exactly the same, just made better.

A lot of P120 (see above) processors were sold as P90, cos that is what people wanted.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by 4th gen+15 March 2004 - 02:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (4th gen @ 15 March 2004 - 02:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-4play@15 March 2004 - 00:09
I might be wrong but it depends on how big the file is and what file system you are using.

if your using fat it should not increase as the file allocation table will just include the extra character in its allotted space. the file remains exactly the same.

if your using ntfs it will depend on the file size as it deals with small files in a different way from large files. of course folders are small so no it will not make a differnce.

I think lamsey is right. especailly about the pool playing.
4play, I&#39;m not talking about windows itself, I&#39;m talking about soulseek. Soulseek keeps a text file containing all the folder and filenames you have shared. [/b][/quote]
I cant be ar5ed going into it but what he feck

My shared.cfg file for my soulseek is 139kb. My cluster size is 16k, on that drive. So it need 9 clusters, with 5kb left over on the last cluster.

The 0s are unlikely to change the available space.

If the config file was 144kb just now, that would be different, then a new 16kb cluster would be required.

[bigboab]

Feck it. Are the pubs closed yet. :lol:

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by bigboab@15 March 2004 - 02:25
Feck it. Are the pubs closed yet. :lol:
:beerchug: