Jeff Dyck <jdyck@... > wrote: >From: "Jeff Dyck" <jdyck@...> > >Is it still better to use HFS over HFS+ with the latest LAMP? I'm thinking >of buying a new big external Ultra-Wide SCSI hard drive and I'm wondering >how I should format it. I guess with HFS+ I could have one big partition, >which would be cool, but would that affect performance? I have worked with both HFS and HFS+ and didn´t find a feelable difference. So you should go for HFS+ because it saves space. >Or is a >multi-partitioned HFS drive faster? The first partition is allways faster then the others, because it uses the first tracks of the HD. The other partitions use the space more to the center of the HD. As the HD is spinning with a constant speed the more you get to the middle of the HD the slower it is. I allways make 2 partitions and use the first one for audio - you can measure the speed with eg Toast by just loading a large file to both of the partitions and then do the data rate test. But I think on a UW drive both partitions should be fast enough ;-) Ray ----------------------------------------------------------- Raymund Beyer |_ ray@... http://www.brainstorm-music.de |_ H1, 1-2 ICQ: 17201606 |_ 68159 Mannheim Fon +49 (0) 621 6858000 |_ Germany -----------------------------------------------------------