FAT32 or NTFS

david2406 · 07-17-2006, 05:48 PM

I have just renewed our data storage server. The old one was running Windows 98 and it was FAT32. I have just bought a new Celeron machine that is running NTFS. The old server took about 2 seconds to access the files while the new one now takes about 40 seconds to access. Is it better to reformat the new server using FAT32 or ?

Any ideas.

yankeebean · 07-17-2006, 10:21 PM

im not an expert although, i also refomatted my hard drive and did alot of googling regaurding Fat32/NTFS.

the results showed me that NTFS has better security & more reliable..
just google it and have a read..

Yankeebean

**Fox** · 07-17-2006, 10:51 PM

If you work with any files that are larger than 4gb (DVD images, large videos, etc.), they won't be supported by FAT32.

I would recommend NTFS- I have a hunch that whatever's making the access slower doesn't have much if anything to do with the filesystem.

Antecer · 07-17-2006, 11:48 PM

Try defraging the FAT32 drive?

I've read around that there are some benifits of running FAT32 drives, but nothing worth keeping drives in FAT32 mode.

david2406 · 07-17-2006, 11:56 PM

It is a brand new computer. All I have done is transfer all the old data from the old server to the new one.

crazijoe · 07-18-2006, 05:39 AM

It sounds more like a hardware issue than a file system problem. Have you checked your event logs?

**johnwill** · 07-18-2006, 05:40 PM

I agree, I'm certain that NTFS isn't the reason for this issue. Is it just the initial access to the server that's the issue? How about some exact symptoms.

david2406 · 07-18-2006, 06:29 PM

All that I have done is copy all the dat from the old sever straight to the new one. Everytime I try to access the data from one of our workstation pcs it takes 40 seconds to 1 minute to even list the files. When I plug the old server back in this one only takes 2 seconds. I might have to get a network person in to have a look at it. I don't know, it doesn't make any sense to me. The 7 year old Pentium 2 is faster than the new Celeron 3gHz . With all the same files. The only difference that I could see was the file system, I am only clutching at straws.

Thanks

**Squashman** · 07-21-2006, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by david2406

The only difference that I could see was the file system,

You didn't notice there was a different Operating System.

**johnwill** · 07-22-2006, 11:19 AM

Stop Browsing Scheduled Tasks

Open up the Registry Editor by clicking the Start Menu and selecting Run.
Type regedit in the text box and click the OK button.

Once the Registry Editor has loaded, expand the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE key.
Next, expand Software and then Microsoft.

Locate Windows and expand that as well.

You will want to be editing the main system files, so expand CurrentVersion.

Because this feature is a feature of the Windows component known as Explorer, expand the Explorer key.

Next, you will want to modify the remote computer settings, so expand the RemoteComputer key and then expand the NameSpace key to show all of the features that are enabled when you browse to a remote computer.

In the NameSpace folder you will find two entries. One is "{2227A280-3AEA-1069-A2DE-08002B30309D}" which tells Explorer to show printers shared on the remote machine. The other, "{D6277990-4C6A-11CF-8D87-00AA0060F5BF}," tells Explorer to show remote scheduled tasks. This is the one that you should delete.

david2406 · 07-23-2006, 03:27 PM

I have tried this but it doesn't seem to make a difference.

07-17-2006, 05:48 PM	#1 (permalink)
david2406 Registered User Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4 OS: XP	FAT32 or NTFS I have just renewed our data storage server. The old one was running Windows 98 and it was FAT32. I have just bought a new Celeron machine that is running NTFS. The old server took about 2 seconds to access the files while the new one now takes about 40 seconds to access. Is it better to reformat the new server using FAT32 or ? Any ideas.

07-17-2006, 10:51 PM	#3 (permalink)
Fox TSF Enthusiast Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: NJ Posts: 7,752 OS: XP Pro, CentOS My System	If you work with any files that are larger than 4gb (DVD images, large videos, etc.), they won't be supported by FAT32. I would recommend NTFS- I have a hunch that whatever's making the access slower doesn't have much if anything to do with the filesystem. __________________ Antec Neo Power 500W, ABIT IP35-E, Intel E2180@2.66Ghz, Corsair XMS2 2x1GB DDR2-800, PNY 8800GT, 320GB Seagate * lazy college student alert *- If I've inadvertently ignored a thread, please Let me know about it Have I helped you solve your problem? Donate to Techsupportforums Klart Skepp!

07-18-2006, 05:39 AM	#6 (permalink)
crazijoe Registered User Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Omaha, The Center of the Universe Posts: 7,632 OS: WinXP, Win2K3 My System	It sounds more like a hardware issue than a file system problem. Have you checked your event logs? __________________ Microsoft MCSA + Messaging, MVP, A+, Network+ http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b3...other/Help.jpg Do you want a real Republican? HDD diagnostic tools / HDD data recovery software

07-18-2006, 05:40 PM	#7 (permalink)
johnwill Manager, Networking Forums Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: S.E. Pennsylvania, US Posts: 41,857 OS: Windows 7, XP-Pro, Vista, Linux Blog Entries: 1	I agree, I'm certain that NTFS isn't the reason for this issue. Is it just the initial access to the server that's the issue? How about some exact symptoms. __________________ If TSF has helped you, Tell us about it! or Donate to help keep the site up! Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

07-22-2006, 11:19 AM	#10 (permalink)
johnwill Manager, Networking Forums Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: S.E. Pennsylvania, US Posts: 41,857 OS: Windows 7, XP-Pro, Vista, Linux Blog Entries: 1	Stop Browsing Scheduled Tasks Open up the Registry Editor by clicking the Start Menu and selecting Run. Type regedit in the text box and click the OK button. Once the Registry Editor has loaded, expand the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE key. Next, expand Software and then Microsoft. Locate Windows and expand that as well. You will want to be editing the main system files, so expand CurrentVersion. Because this feature is a feature of the Windows component known as Explorer, expand the Explorer key. Next, you will want to modify the remote computer settings, so expand the RemoteComputer key and then expand the NameSpace key to show all of the features that are enabled when you browse to a remote computer. In the NameSpace folder you will find two entries. One is "{2227A280-3AEA-1069-A2DE-08002B30309D}" which tells Explorer to show printers shared on the remote machine. The other, "{D6277990-4C6A-11CF-8D87-00AA0060F5BF}," tells Explorer to show remote scheduled tasks. This is the one that you should delete. __________________ If TSF has helped you, Tell us about it! or Donate to help keep the site up! Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

07-17-2006, 10:21 PM	#2 (permalink)
yankeebean Registered User Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Sydney Posts: 155 OS: xp	im not an expert although, i also refomatted my hard drive and did alot of googling regaurding Fat32/NTFS. the results showed me that NTFS has better security & more reliable.. just google it and have a read.. Yankeebean

07-17-2006, 11:48 PM	#4 (permalink)
Antecer Registered User Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Sydney Posts: 6 OS: Windows Xp	Try defraging the FAT32 drive? I've read around that there are some benifits of running FAT32 drives, but nothing worth keeping drives in FAT32 mode.

07-17-2006, 11:56 PM	#5 (permalink)
david2406 Registered User Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4 OS: XP	It is a brand new computer. All I have done is transfer all the old data from the old server to the new one.

07-18-2006, 06:29 PM	#8 (permalink)
david2406 Registered User Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4 OS: XP	All that I have done is copy all the dat from the old sever straight to the new one. Everytime I try to access the data from one of our workstation pcs it takes 40 seconds to 1 minute to even list the files. When I plug the old server back in this one only takes 2 seconds. I might have to get a network person in to have a look at it. I don't know, it doesn't make any sense to me. The 7 year old Pentium 2 is faster than the new Celeron 3gHz . With all the same files. The only difference that I could see was the file system, I am only clutching at straws. Thanks

07-23-2006, 03:27 PM	#11 (permalink)
david2406 Registered User Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4 OS: XP	I have tried this but it doesn't seem to make a difference.