Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!endor!singer
From: singer@endor.harvard.edu (THINK Technologies)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: HFS Flames
Message-ID: <3580@husc6.harvard.edu>
Date: 16 Dec 87 22:47:37 GMT
Sender: news@husc6.harvard.edu
Reply-To: singer@endor.UUCP (THINK Technologies)
Organization: THINK Technologies, Bedford, MA
Lines: 47


This afternoon, a very small part of my  hard disk simply dropped out of
existence. This part of the directory structure included my System file,
and some other files that were in my System Folder. When I did a Disk
First Aid, it said "Unable to verify status of disk". Which is what it 
always says. When I did a DiskExpress "Examine Volume", DE said "the directory
on this volume is damaged". Which I already knew.

When I ran HD SC Setup (1.5), it sat around for a minute and then told me it
couldn't find any suitable SCSI drives. However, the Finder, and every
other application, had no problems seeing my hard disk.

What's more, I could switch-launch to the hard disk, eject my floppy, and
run everything just fine, even though the System file was conspicuously absent.

So anyway, I erased the disk and did a restore; I had good backups and
didn't lose anything. Things seem to be OK for now.

** Flame On **

	My question: why the HELL isn't there any redundancy in the filesystem?
Any self-respecting file system (unix comes to mind) has copies of the
directory stored elsewhere, and can fall back on these copies if necessary.
Apple, in their infinite wisdom, removed file tags, and justified it by
saying "If you can't restored data without file tags, then file tags are
no help." Nonsense! File tags help restore the information, even if the
directory structure gets lost. This would be nice.

So how about a redundant-directory file system? Can someone offer a GOOD
reason? Besides performance? And disk space? Both are valid considerations,
but when faced with the prospect of total data loss, I'd pick a slower
disk with two copies of the directory. And with a SCSI hard disk (as the
standard is quickly becoming) neither speed nor space overhead is a consider-
ation.

** Flame Off **

Sigh.

		--Rich

**The opinions stated herein are my own opinions and do not necessarily
represent the policies or opinions of my employer (THINK Technologies).

* Richard M. Siegel | {decvax, ucbvax, sun}!harvard!endor!singer    *
* Customer Support  | singer@endor.harvard.edu			    *
* Symantec, THINK Technologies Division.  (No snappy quote)         *