92 lines
3.7 KiB
Markdown
92 lines
3.7 KiB
Markdown
26/11/20
|
|
|
|
## File System Implementation
|
|
|
|
1. Contiguous
|
|
2. Linked Lists
|
|
3. File Allocation Table (FAT)
|
|
4. I-nodes (lookups)
|
|
|
|
### File access
|
|
|
|
Files will be composed of a number of blocks. Files are **sequential** or **random access**. Random access is essential for example in database systems.
|
|
|
|
#### Contiguous Allocation
|
|
|
|
**Contiguous file systems** are similar to **dynamic partitioning** in memory allocation.
|
|
|
|
> Each file is stored in a single group of **adjacent blocks** on the hard disk
|
|
>
|
|
> Allocation of free space can be done using **first fit, best fit, next fit**.
|
|
>
|
|
> * However when files are removed, this can lead to external fragmentation.
|
|
>
|
|
> **Advantages**
|
|
>
|
|
> * **Simple** to implement - only location of the first block and the length of the file must be stored
|
|
> * **Optimal read/write performance** - blocks are clustered in nearby sectors, hence the seek time (of the hard drive) is minimised
|
|
>
|
|
> **Disadvantages**
|
|
>
|
|
> * The **exact size** is not known before hand (what if the file size exceeds the initially allocated disk space)
|
|
> * **Allocation algorithms** needed to decide which free blocks to allocate to a given file
|
|
> * Deleting a file results in **external fragmentation**
|
|
>
|
|
> Contiguous allocation is still in use in **CD-ROMS & DVDs**
|
|
>
|
|
> * External fragmentation isn't an issue here as files are written once.
|
|
|
|
#### Linked List Allocation
|
|
|
|
To avoid external fragmentation, files are stored in **separate blocks** that are **linked**.
|
|
|
|
> Only the address of the first block has to be stored to locate a file
|
|
>
|
|
> * Each block contains a **data pointer** to the next block
|
|
>
|
|
> **Advantages**
|
|
>
|
|
> * Easy to maintain (only the first block needs to be maintained in directory entry)
|
|
> * File sizes can **grow and shrink dynamically**
|
|
> * There is **no external fragmentation** - every possible block/sector is used (can be used)
|
|
> * Sequential access is straight forward - although **more seek operations** required
|
|
>
|
|
> **Disadvantages**
|
|
>
|
|
> * **Random access is very slow**, to retrieve a block in the middle, one has to walk through the list from the start
|
|
> * There is some **internal fragmentation** - on average the last half of the block is left unused
|
|
> * Internal fragmentation will reduce for **smaller block sizes**
|
|
> * However **larger blocks** will be **faster**
|
|
> * Space for data is lost within the blocks due to the pointer, the data in a **block is no longer a power of 2**
|
|
> * **Diminished reliability**: if one block is corrupted/lost, access to the rest of the file is lost.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### File Allocation Tables
|
|
|
|
* Store the linked-list pointers in a **separate index table** called a **file allocation table** in memory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> **Advantages**
|
|
>
|
|
> * **Block size remains power of 2** - no more space is lost to the pointer
|
|
> * **Index table** can be kept in memory allowing fast non-sequential access
|
|
>
|
|
> **Disadvantages**
|
|
>
|
|
> * The size of the file allocation table grows with the number of blocks, and hence the size of the disk
|
|
> * For a 200GB disk, with 1KB block size, 200 million entries are required, assuming that each entry at the table occupies 4 bytes, this required 800MB of main memory.
|
|
|
|
#### I-Nodes
|
|
|
|
Each file has a small data structure (on disk) called an **I-node** (index-node) that contains it's attributes and block pointers
|
|
|
|
> In contrast to FAT, an I-node is **only loaded when a file is open**
|
|
>
|
|
> If every I-node consists of $n$ bytes, and at most $k$ files can be open at any point in time, at most $n\times k$ bytes of main memory are required.
|
|
|
|
I-nodes are composed of **direct block pointers** (usually 10) **indirect block pointers** or a combination thereof.
|
|
|
|
|