Change Folder Names ---> Decrease Free Space

[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

Your mother&#39;s a Peruvian hooker

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] https://filesharingtalk.com/index.php...pic=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] https://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showt...=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

[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

[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] https://filesharingtalk.com/index.php...pic=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] https://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showt...=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

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] https://filesharingtalk.com/index.php...pic=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] https://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showt...=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

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.

[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.

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] https://filesharingtalk.com/index.php...pic=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] https://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showt...=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

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.

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]
It was your bloody round you miser

[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.