🚀 go-pugleaf

Barry Shilliday (barry_s@nibelung.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> I'm tired of people flaming AFS, saying how it crashes their drives, how it's no
> faster than FFS.  The fact is it *is* a lot faster, it is practically impossible
> to invalidate and is infinitely better than FFS-DC.

Agreed.

> 'But it crashed my HD' people say.  Well if they RTFM and set the proper
> maxtrans rate etc, and used HDToolBox/RDPrep properly then maybe they wouldn't
> have these problems. 

Absolute Bollocks!

> If you don't have a clue, stay away from AFS.  Otherwise
> use it, it's one of the most useful things available.

It is great if you are prepared to lose the lot for no reason. Oh and when
you do, don't expect FLD to help out, coz they'll deny it was AFS.

I lost a partition last week. Fortunately I saw it going so backed up the
new bits and reformatted.

Buy AFS, but buy a backup device too.
-- 
           James  ^o^  CountB ^o^  http://www.u-net.com/~gothic

         "Over and over we die one after the other..." - The Cure

Barry Shilliday (barry_s@nibelung.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> I'm tired of people flaming AFS, saying how it crashes their drives, how it's no
> faster than FFS.

With a fast drive, and a caching program, FFS can be as fast for
read/write access. Directory listings never get as fast, but it
depends on what the major use of your drive is

> The fact is it *is* a lot faster, it is practically impossible
> to invalidate and is infinitely better than FFS-DC.

DCFFS is a bag 'o' shite [tm], and why does eveyone get so annoyed abo
invalidation? 99% of the time the drive chugs for a while, and
eveything settles down.

> 'But it crashed my HD' people say.  Well if they RTFM and set the proper
> maxtrans rate etc, and used HDToolBox/RDPrep properly then maybe they wouldn't
> have these problems.  If you don't have a clue, stay away from AFS.  Otherwise
> use it, it's one of the most useful things available.

So I don't have a clue, CountB doesn't have a clue, and all the other
people who've had trouble with it?

For your information, I sat with a copy of the instructions for AFS,
and set them exactly as suggested, still no luck. I'm sure after his
first loss to AFS, CountB was very careful to set everything exactly,
result, another trashed drive.

Perhaps you would like to advise those of us who don't have a clue,
just how to set AFS up on _our_ machines so that it works, until then,
please everybody, accept that AFS does not work for everybody.

Paul

[disa yet again removed from the followups of an unsuitable post]
--
"I think such creatures are an attempt by the universe to make sure that
 we never take ourselves too seriously."
        -- Delenn (re: cats), "A Race Through Dark Places"

Barry Shilliday (barry_s@nibelung.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> I'm tired of people flaming AFS, saying how it crashes their drives, how it's no

And I'm sick and tired of people bringing this up in disa.

> 'But it crashed my HD' people say.  Well if they RTFM and set the proper
> maxtrans rate etc, and used HDToolBox/RDPrep properly then maybe they wouldn't
> have these problems.  If you don't have a clue, stay away from AFS.  Otherwise

Bollocks (tm). I know several people who certainly "have a clue" who have 
encountered serious problems with it. Try reading the AFS mailing list.

Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.applications,comp.sys.amiga.misc
so you can have the last word.

-- 
http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/1666                       Team AMIGA
Lonely bachelor,blonde eyes-green hair

Barry Shilliday (barry_s@nibelung.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: I'm tired of people flaming AFS, saying how it crashes their drives, how it's no
: faster than FFS.  The fact is it *is* a lot faster, it is practically impossible
: to invalidate and is infinitely better than FFS-DC.

: 'But it crashed my HD' people say.  Well if they RTFM and set the proper
: maxtrans rate etc, and used HDToolBox/RDPrep properly then maybe they wouldn't
: have these problems.  If you don't have a clue, stay away from AFS.  Otherwise
: use it, it's one of the most useful things available.

I have to agree with you there.
I got my copy of AFS the day after I got my A1200 with 1 GIG HD.
The reason I got AFS (Pro) was to protect my investment in such a large
hard drive.  Seeing as for the past 8-9 years I had been using an A500 with
two floppies, and 1.5M extra mem (I used to think that kicked ass, boy I was
stoopid) the route to a HD seemed alien to me so I decided to RTFM.  Did
everything they said, and BOO YAA it worked.  With the exception of PM3.
But that worked when I actually put the max trans rate to what they suggested
in the manual.  I have had my A1200 since End of October/Begining of November
and never once have I had problems with AFS.  It worked like all the reviews
said, even during the power cut we had 3 weeks ago when I was copying some
files with DOpus5.  I know some of you guys may be impatient to get the baby
running but do read the manual.

Aaron
-oOo-

ObPraise:
I love the amiga community, post a problem one day, get various replies both
by email and news within 24 hrs.  Someone always has been on the same
situation and knows what to do.  Long live the AMIGA!!.

CountB schrieb in comp.sys.amiga.applications ueber "Re: AFS a piece of
crap? no":

>> For AFS you must buy a _beta_ DSv4...

>Indeed. And it only does salvage, so you still can't undelete en masse.
>Oh it it never remounts the drive.

Yes DiskSalv 4 beta for AFS is just crap ;-)

(Dave dont kill me for that words... they are just true;-)

|_| _ |o _  _   Martin        steigerw@stud.uni-frankfurt.de
| |(/_||(_)_>   Steigerwald   http://home.pages.de/~helios

Humans for peace, love and holding each other!!! -->
Bytes for peace, love and holding each other!!!

CountB schrieb in comp.sys.amiga.applications ueber "Re: AFS a piece of
crap? no":

values for my system

>               FFS         AFS
>100% Safe      no          no
                            yes
>Invalidatable  yes         no
>Killable       yes         yes
                            no
>Non Fixable    no          yes
                            obsolete ;-)
>Supported      yes         hmmmm
                            yes, there you are right,
                            support could be better

>You won't get 50% on AFS. When it dies, it does it 100% effectively.

It never died here. I never lost one single byte. There had been never any
invalidation.

|_| _ |o _  _   Martin        steigerw@stud.uni-frankfurt.de
| |(/_||(_)_>   Steigerwald   http://home.pages.de/~helios

Microsoft is prohibited from redistributing my work in any form, in  whole
or  in part. License to distribute this post is available to Microsoft for
$10.000 payable within 30 days  to  Martin  Steigerwald.  Posting  without
permission constitutes an agreement to these terms. Please send notices of
violation to steigerw@stud.uni-frankfurt.de and Postmaster@microsoft.com.

Martin Steigerwald (steigerw@stud.uni-frankfurt.de) wrote:
> CountB schrieb in comp.sys.amiga.applications ueber "Re: AFS a piece of
> crap? no":
> 
> >> For AFS you must buy a _beta_ DSv4...
> 
> >Indeed. And it only does salvage, so you still can't undelete en masse.
> >Oh it it never remounts the drive.
> 
> Yes DiskSalv 4 beta for AFS is just crap ;-)
> 
> (Dave dont kill me for that words... they are just true;-)

I don't think Dave wrote the AFS bits. They were FLD.
-- 
           James  ^o^  CountB ^o^  http://www.u-net.com/~gothic

                "Learning to cry for fun and profit" - SoM

Dr. Peter Kittel schrieb in comp.sys.amiga.applications ueber "Re: AFS a
piece of crap? no":

>>I don't totally agree here. AFS should come with a strong warning that
>>there is little you can do to recover from a disaster.

>If you believe AFS, there should never happen any disaster again. But
>that's not true it seems.

I _never_ had an disaster with AFS (version 15.7, 15.9, 16.15beta).

So for me it _is_ true.

Recoverytools not needed. Maybe only for deleting files by accident.

For me AFS is far better than FFS...

I really would like a stable version of FFS, but _there_ is none. Even FFS
40.1 does have its problems... at least if have a crash during writes...

And Diskvalidator itself it totally crap... Oh, I wish I would have some
screenshots of the situations where diskvalidator failed so totally that I
had to reformat the drive.

BTW: Have you ever used AFS? If not, then please state this, so that
others can see that your comments are just unproved oppinions.

|_| _ |o _  _   Martin        steigerw@stud.uni-frankfurt.de
| |(/_||(_)_>   Steigerwald   http://home.pages.de/~helios

Amiga 6000 is ready!! Purchase it for $9999...

Martin Steigerwald (steigerw@stud.uni-frankfurt.de) wrote:
> 
> BTW: Have you ever used AFS? If not, then please state this, so that
> others can see that your comments are just unproved oppinions.

I have. I do. It simply *is* *not* safe. Fast - yes. Devalidation proof -
yes. Safe - not enough.
-- 
           James  ^o^  CountB ^o^  http://www.u-net.com/~gothic

   Never stand in, on, above, below, beside, or anywhere near a grave, 
            tomb, crypt, mausoleum, or other house of the dead.

In article <1996052981713bryce@gothic.u-net.com>, bryce@gothic.u-net.com 
says...

>> BTW: Have you ever used AFS? If not, then please state this, so that
>> others can see that your comments are just unproved oppinions.

>I have. I do. It simply *is* *not* safe. Fast - yes. Devalidation proof -
>yes. Safe - not enough.

Why do you think so?  I am using the commercial release v2.2 (not one of those 
Betas available), and have found it VERY stable.  I had *ONE* problem with it, 
and that was probably due to my DMA mask being set wrongly.  I create, copy, 
rename & delete file frequently, and so have put it to test quite heavily.

Anyone who has problems with AFS of v2.2 (before had a few bugs) has most 
probably set something wrong - or even not changed the settings that FFS uses!
Unlike FFS, AFS does mind if the Max Transfer or DMA mask is set wrong - which 
is because it pushes the Harddrive performance pretty hard.

v2.4 & v3.0 sound even better...

-- 
From Christopher Handley
  Email: ela95csh@sheffield.ac.uk
-------------------------------------------------------sig v2.12 A---------
  //Amiga A1200/`030/40MHz/4Mb Fast ram |*Amiga - Back to kick ass:
\\/  + PowerStation (SCSI 540Mb Hd  +   |AB3D II, Virtual Rally, VK Deluxe,
 2.4 speed CD drive + SyQuest EZ135)    |Star Fighter, Xtreme Racing, ...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chris Handley (ELA95CSH@shef.ac.uk) wrote:
> In article <1996052981713bryce@gothic.u-net.com>, bryce@gothic.u-net.com 
> says...
> 
> >> BTW: Have you ever used AFS? If not, then please state this, so that
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> others can see that your comments are just unproved oppinions.
> 
> >I have. I do. It simply *is* *not* safe. Fast - yes. Devalidation proof -
   ^^^^^^        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >yes. Safe - not enough.
> 
> Why do you think so?  I am using the commercial release v2.2 (not one of those 

For about the hundredth time this thread Brycie thinks so because he's seen
things go wrong on more than one occasion with it. And yes he does know how
to set the damn thing up. Do you know how to read other articles in a thread
before regurgitating the same tired old praises again and again.

Note the words I've highlighted in the previous articles.

*Tez* who's really getting sick and tired of this.

-- 
http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/1666                       Team AMIGA
Support your local police force -- steal!!

: Anyone who has problems with AFS of v2.2 (before had a few bugs) has most
: probably set something wrong - or even not changed the settings that FFS uses!
: Unlike FFS, AFS does mind if the Max Transfer or DMA mask is set wrong - which
: is because it pushes the Harddrive performance pretty hard.

Why does everyone always say this? Why can't people consider the fact
that if someone has had a problem with AFS it may not be their fault?
Why don't they consider the fact that maybe when the fault, which has
occurred on a range of machines, was reported to FLD they
ignored/dismissed it? Why can't they consider that in some cases it
may be user error, but when people have been in touch with FLD (not an
easy job), checked all the settings etc it still happens?

NOTE: The above is not aimed at anyone in particular, but at anyone
who's aimed a 'you've got a pirate copy', 'you're an idiot, you can't
set it up right' or similar comment at anyone who's ever said they've
had trouble with AFS

It can go wrong, anything can, saying it doesn't for you does not
change that.

When (if) it does happen to you, I hope people are much more
sympathetic to you than you were to them.

Paul

--
"I think such creatures are an attempt by the universe to make sure that
 we never take ourselves too seriously."
        -- Delenn (re: cats), "A Race Through Dark Places"