Hacking Is there a single advantage to a WBFS formatted drive?

[Foxi4]

From what I understood, there is no need to worry about fragmentation..

This is how it works - you have files on your drive, you remove one somewhere down the line - a gap between files is left. Then, you put on a bigger file and since it cannot fit in the hole, it divides itself into two parts - that's fragmentation. Gradually you get more gaps and files become more fragmented, and since utilities that can defragment WBFS are not user-friendly, it's a pain in the ass. Eventally you end up with an under-performing drive, or in case of WBFS, a corrupt one.

Look, I used WBFS when I innitially bought the Wii and switched as soon as it was possible after two instances of corrupt data. WBFS is crap and I know it from personal experience. Use FAT32 and occasionally defragment after file operations.

 

[SoraK05]

I recall being told by Waninkoko that there is no fragmentation, which made me think that it is on the same line as a linux filesystem using nodes, meaning fragmentation is generally not something to be concerned about.

 

[PsyBlade]

1. basically all filesystems fragment
2. wbfs does so too
3. this has nothing to do with wbfs corruption
4. you want filesystems have the ability to fragment - the alternative is not to allow saving or enlarging a file if there is no single free space chunk large enough
6. the specific filesystem driver used can introduce A LOT of unneccesarry fragmentation - early dos/windows drivers were really bad while the linux/unix ones were better
7. no fragmentation in linux is a old myth based on the bad windows fs drivers of the time
8. the allocation policy of all wbfs driver I have seen sucks - it does not even try to avoid fragmentation
9. this could be changed but there was no interest
10. new drives are fast enough to make normal fragmentation a non issue - exessive still comes with a penalty
11. there are (modern) filesystems/storagesolutions that fragment a lot - to save space and increase fault tolerance (COW)

 

[Daidude]

Sorry for being lazy but I currently have a 1tb hardrive with 3 partitions: 1. WBFS - Wii games 2. NTFS - Laptop Backup 3. FAT32 - Homebrew stuff

Is there a reason I should convert them all to FAT 32 or NTFS and is there any guide to do so?

Thanks

I'd recommend all FAT32, as it covers everything (except 4GB+ files, so no blueray movies), but if you don't want to format anything, use http://gbatemp.net/t...320-wbfs2fatpy/ to convert your WBFS partition to FAT32. It will only take a few seconds. WBFS partitions tend to get corrupted, and then you can't recover any files from it.

So, i decided to convert my main drive to FAT32 using wbfs2fat and I had some troubles when using wit and wwt ( I got confused when using the wit command line interface to repair my wbfs drive cause it had some bad sectors or something in a scan).
Basically, I went forward with converting my drive to FAT32 but now I've lost about 40 of my games which I guess were corrupted or something but is there anyway I can get them back quickly without dwnloading them again?

Help is greatly appreciated

 

[PsyBlade]

wwt can only repair the filesystem itself.
It can not repair the damaged games (nothing can) it can only remove them.
I guess thats what you did when you were confused.
There is no way to get them back and even if there were they would still have the damage they began with.

Unless you got 100Mbps net I recomend you simply rip them again, should be faster then downloading even if its a bit more work.

 

[JoostinOnline]

It varies depending on the size of the game, but for me the average game (being around 3GB) only takes about 15 minutes to rip.

 

[Daidude]

wwt can only repair the filesystem itself.
It can not repair the damaged games (nothing can) it can only remove them.
I guess thats what you did when you were confused.
There is no way to get them back and even if there were they would still have the damage they began with.

Unless you got 100Mbps net I recomend you simply rip them again, should be faster then downloading even if its a bit more work.

It varies depending on the size of the game, but for me the average game (being around 3GB) only takes about 15 minutes to rip.

At least now that I know I can't get them back I can stop trying, I guess I'll have to download them again and rip some of them from the original disc, thanks for the help.

 

[Retro_Mod_Gamer]

I have a brand new Sandisk 128gb USB drive that wouldn't detect on ntfs, would freeze on fat32, but runs perfectly on WBFS.

 

[ScarletDreamz]

I have a brand new Sandisk 128gb USB drive that wouldn't detect on ntfs, would freeze on fat32, but runs perfectly on WBFS.

Well, thats good to know on a 5 years old thread....