But that's just it, my drive is on;y 1 gig (uncompressede, 2 gig compressed).
It has something to do with that now each file is taking up a full cluster,
when it could in theory only take take up a sector (512 bytes). This is
according to what I'm reading in this Secrets book.
> > A while back I compressed my HD to a CVF. When I go to properties of
> > even the smallest files it still says 32kb are being used. Now, I
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
> Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
The MDFAT in the CVF uses a granularity of single sectors, but this doesn't
necessarily translate into a sector-level file allocation. I think the
following article describes the issue:
Knowledge Base
How DoubleSpace Uses Sector Allocation
PSS ID Number: 98407
Article Last Modified on 12/17/2000
The information in this article applies to:
Microsoft MS-DOS operating system 6.0
Microsoft MS-DOS operating system 6.2
Microsoft MS-DOS operating system 6.22
Microsoft Plus! for Windows 95
Microsoft Windows 95
This article was previously published under Q98407
This information applies to both Microsoft DoubleSpace and Microsoft
DriveSpace. For MS-DOS 6.00 and 6.20, use DBLSPACE in place of DRVSPACE for
commands and filenames.
SUMMARY
DriveSpace uses sector allocation granularity even though you cannot see
evidence of this in the Bytes Available On Disk value reported by CHKDSK.
MORE INFORMATION
Since the file allocation table (FAT) system is cluster based, DriveSpace
uses its own FAT (which is called the MDFAT [Microsoft DriveSpace FAT]) to
achieve sector allocation. Each entry in the FAT corresponds to an entry in
the MDFAT, as well as a logical cluster of 8 kilobytes (K) for MS-DOS and
Windows 95 DriveSpace, or 32 K for Plus! DriveSpace 3. Each MDFAT entry also
corresponds to a sequence of sectors less than or equal to 8K (MS-DOS and
Windows 95 DriveSpace) or 32 K (Plus! DriveSpace 3).
NOTE: Plus! DriveSpace 3 supports fragmented MDFAT clusters, so a 32 K
DriveSpace 3 MDFAT cluster need not necessarily be contiguous.
Since disk size reporting is accomplished by adding up the total number of
clusters and then multiplying by the cluster size, there is no way to get a
non-cluster size value for Total Disk Space or Bytes Available On Disk
values from CHKDSK.
Estimated Compression Ratio (ECR)
When you run CHKDSK on a DriveSpace drive, it lists the number of used
clusters in terms of uncompressed data. When it lists the number of unused
clusters, it must specify some multiple of clusters based on how many
compressed clusters it thinks can fit inside the actual free space. It does
this by taking the ECR and multiplying it by the actual free space on the
drive (in sectors) and then dividing that by the number of sectors in a
cluster (16).
As a result, free disk space can only be specified as a integral number of
clusters.
Additional query words: 6.00 6.20 Granular double space dblspace
Keywords: KB98407
Technology: kbGamesSearch kbMSDOS600 kbMSDOS620 kbMSDOS622 kbMSDOSSearch
kbPlus95 kbPlusSearch kbWin95search kbZNotKeyword3
Send feedback to Microsoft
© 2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Signature
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
> But that's just it, my drive is on;y 1 gig (uncompressede, 2 gig
> compressed).
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>> LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
>> Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Fred Goldman - 11 Jul 2005 13:59 GMT
Thanks Jef for that. It seems from this article that if I wouldn't have
compressed the drive I would still be seeing 32kb for every small file. Is
this true?
> The MDFAT in the CVF uses a granularity of single sectors, but this doesn't
> necessarily translate into a sector-level file allocation. I think the
[quoted text clipped - 90 lines]
> >> LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
> >> Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Jeff Richards - 12 Jul 2005 10:22 GMT
Yes - with FAT the cluster is the smallest possible allocation unit, so even
a 1-byte file would consume a whole cluster.

Signature
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
> Thanks Jef for that. It seems from this article that if I wouldn't have
> compressed the drive I would still be seeing 32kb for every small file. Is
> this true?