Suggested format for (big) SDHC?

[Chairman_Now]

I just got a great deal on a 32gig SDHC card, and I just got my Pandora... and I want to put the two of them together.


The SDHC card came formatted with exFAT, and that won't do. So - what is the suggested format at this point? I'd hate to have to use vfat, since I want to use some very large files (potentially). OTOH, I've seen some potential issues with using ext2... and I'm guessing that ext3 or other journalled formats will rot out flash memory?

 

[neko]

I use ext3.


http://www.gp32x.de/board/index.php?/topic/54928-64gb-sdxc-cards/

 

[Chairman_Now]

I use ext3.


http://www.gp32x.de...4gb-sdxc-cards/

Thanks, will follow your lead. Hopefully the journal won't affect the media longevity.

 

[Link]

I thought FAT 32 was preferred?


Peace & Pandora,


Link

 

[WizardStan]

A journaled file system can wear the flash a little more, but SD cards have proper wear leveling, so you shouldn't really notice any problems for a year or three, by which time you could probably just replace it with something new for cheap.


If you want to keep Windows compatibility for any reason, you can use NTFS. It requires the community codec pack be installed on your Pandora, but otherwise works fine.

 

[slaeshjag]

You can also use ext3 in Windows by installing a ext2/3 driver.

 

[WizardStan]

That requires installing it on every PC you use though. If you're out at the library or visiting a friend and want to quickly transfer something, even if they let you it'll still be additional time to download and install that driver.

 

[Klaue]

Couldn't you just make two partitions on it, a small one in FAT32 for data sharing and a big one in ext3?


Sure, you couldn't share files bigger than 4 GB (4 GB - 1 Byte to be exact), but you'd have no problems sharing while still using a native file system for your games.


Or does the pandora have problems with multiple partitions on a single card? (is it even possible? I never tried it with an SD card, but I can't see why it shouldn't work)

 

[elwing]

Couldn't you just make two partitions on it, a small one in FAT32 for data sharing and a big one in ext3?


Sure, you couldn't share files bigger than 4 GB (4 GB - 1 Byte to be exact), but you'd have no problems sharing while still using a native file system for your games.


Or does the pandora have problems with multiple partitions on a single card? (is it even possible? I never tried it with an SD card, but I can't see why it shouldn't work)

I think you'dd have to make sure that the FAT32 is the first partition. windows XP by default see only the first partition on a "removable" media... (not sure which partition it shows if the first one is "invalid/unsupported" through...)

 

[Letalis Sonus]

windows XP by default see only the first partition on a "removable" media... (not sure which partition it shows if the first one is "invalid/unsupported" through...)

AFAIK Windows completely ignores the MBR of "removable media" and blindly jumps to where the first partition should start, that means it shouldn't be able to see any partitions that start somewhere else.


As the SD card appears just like any other block device, you can use a MBR with it and therefore have multiple partitions on it, you just won't be able to use the other partitions in Windows.

 

[elwing]

AFAIK Windows completely ignores the MBR of "removable media" and blindly jumps to where the first partition should start, that means it shouldn't be able to see any partitions that start somewhere else.


As the SD card appears just like any other block device, you can use a MBR with it and therefore have multiple partitions on it, you just won't be able to use the other partitions in Windows.

thanks for the details... you can install some "hacked" driver to show your removable media as a fixed disk, but having this completly defeat the purpose of having two partition, you could simply use an ext2/3 driver in place... or as mantionned use ntfs and the comunity codec pack

 

[Klaue]

AFAIK Windows completely ignores the MBR of "removable media" and blindly jumps to where the first partition should start

Eww :mellow:


And we would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for that meddling OS! *shakes fist*

 

[Yannick]

hmz, this reply is getting long...


all opinions derived from years of fiddling.

AFAIK Windows completely ignores the MBR of "removable media" and blindly jumps to where the first partition should start, that means it shouldn't be able to see any partitions that start somewhere else.


As the SD card appears just like any other block device, you can use a MBR with it and therefore have multiple partitions on it, you just won't be able to use the other partitions in Windows.

Are you *shure* about that, that sounds awful lot like windows 98? i have several usb devices with multiple partitions, they all show up just fine in windows (NT 5 or 6). In NT5 or older they do have to be properly ordered in the partition table. having 1 partition defined on row 2-4 with row 1 zeroed out is asking for device manager trouble. had problems wit this in win2k and XP SP1 (you have 3 partitions, you delete 1 & 2 then grow partition 3 => 1 partition defined on row 3)


anyhow, my opinion on FSes:


FAT


pro: when the light stops blinking, your data is on the device, yank it out and plug in another machine


con: no large files


NTFS


pro: large files, best choice for windows users.


con: needs to be safely removed or old kernels (pandora kernel) will refuse to mount it and then you need a windows box to properly remove the drive. This *issue* seems fixed in modern kernels. theoretically you only need to safely remove after writes in windows.


EXT2


pro: every linux box, even your coffee machine and dishwasher can read this (provided they run linux ;-) ), there is a driver for windows


con: if you do not safely remove you are fsck'ed, usually you can recover from this but the recovery process takes ages


EXT3


pro: better protection from power failure (like yanking out the device) much faster recovery, compatible with windows ext2 driver


con:


EXT4


pro: faster then ext3 depending on the kernel/program you measure


con: different default settings among the latest kernels, not stable in older kernels and the windows driver does not work


short summary: use NTFS or EXT3


both are *default* for an entire platform and work on other platforms with an additional driver. just count the number of driver installs you would need to perform and choose the least amount of work


EXT4 disclaimer:


I realize i just went hard on this FS but we are talking about removable media, not root partitions

 

[elwing]

Are you *shure* about that, that sounds awful lot like windows 98? i have several usb devices with multiple partitions, they all show up just fine in windows (NT 5 or 6). In NT5 or older they do have to be properly ordered in the partition table. having 1 partition defined on row 2-4 with row 1 zeroed out is asking for device manager trouble. had problems wit this in win2k and XP SP1 (you have 3 partitions, you delete 1 & 2 then grow partition 3 => 1 partition defined on row 3)

well, I am not sure about the details, but I can confirm that I have to install a "hacked" driver to let XP sp3 see more than the first partition of my drive...

 

[Letalis Sonus]

i have several usb devices with multiple partitions

Stop there, keep in mind we're talking about "removable media". Not every USB device is considered to be "removable media" by Windows. The usual thumb drives are, and I can absolutely confirm that - without any hacked drivers or so - you cannot access any additional partitions on them.

 

[elwing]

Stop there, keep in mind we're talking about "removable media". Not every USB device is considered to be "removable media" by Windows. The usual thumb drives are, and I can absolutely confirm that - without any hacked drivers or so - you cannot access any additional partitions on them.

hum, and basically the "hacked" driver I mantion just make the drive apear as a fixed one...


there is nothing special related to your device itself...

 

[doublebeta]

Yeah, Windows only sees the first partition (being 'unformatted') if the first partition is non-Windoze - I think, 80% sure, that i've had multiple Winblows partitions on a device that is certainly detected as removable media.


I'd check, but, sorry, there's no WAY i'm going to boot into Windows .