home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.programmer:10703 alt.msdos.programmer:2757
- Path: sparky!uunet!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!ai-lab!zurich.ai.mit.edu!pshuang
- From: pshuang@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Ping Huang)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer,alt.msdos.programmer
- Subject: Re: Number of subdirectories limited ?
- Date: 17 Nov 92 13:40:10
- Organization: M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Lab.
- Lines: 20
- Message-ID: <PSHUANG.92Nov17134010@rolex.ai.mit.edu>
- References: <1992Nov17.111130.17833@cs.tu-berlin.de>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: rolex.ai.mit.edu
- In-reply-to: ernst@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de's message of Tue, 17 Nov 1992 11:11:30 GMT
-
- In article <1992Nov17.111130.17833@cs.tu-berlin.de> ernst@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de (Ernst Kloecker) writes:
-
- > I know there is a limitation on the number of subdirectories in the
- > root directory, but is there any limitation in directories other
- > than "\" ?
-
- Why, sure. Each subdirectory you create takes up its own cluster plus 32
- bytes in the parent directory's "file", so the amount of free disk space
- becomes the limiting factor, probably, unless the DOS code for handling
- directory "files" breaks if it becomes larger than 64Kb, which I don't
- think it does, because I think I've had directories with over 2,048
- entries in it. But if you need to ask this question, you are probably
- trying to solve a problem the wrong way. :) Why do you ask about this
- possible limit? Performance-wise, DOS badly loses on big directories.
-
- --
- | Ping Huang (INTERNET: pshuang@martigny.ai.mit.edu) speaking for himself.
- | "One Thing to name them all, One Thing to define them,
- | One Thing to place them in environments and bind them..."
-
-