File names size limit?

[Alejandro]

Hi, I posted this question some time ago with no luck, so I would like to
give a try again in case there are new info about this. I would like to know
the file name size limit in windows vista (or windows server 2003 if
better). For NTFS the limit is 256 characters and this includes the whole
path like c:\folder1\folder2\folder3....\folderN.
I know Microsoft was working in a new file system and was planning to
include it with Vista but later they removed the proyect from Vista, this
file system was SQL-based and I suppose the limit for the file names would
be greatly increased...but now I dont know.
Any info?
Thanks!
Alejandro.

 

[zaph0d beeblebrox]

Windows XP allows file names upto 255 characters in length while Windows
Vista allows filenames containing upto 260 characters

 

[Dustin Harper]

It is still 256 characters (255?) if I remember correctly. It is still based
on NTFS.

WinFS is the next file system, and it should have a MUCH higher limit, if
not theoretically unlimited.

 

[zaph0d beeblebrox]

This is directly from microsoft.com
http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/Wi...7cea-5901-4563-b800-16af596dffb61033.mspx#EIC

Windows usually limits file names to 260 characters. But the file name must
actually be shorter than that, since the complete path (such as C:\Program
Files\filename.txt) is included in this character count. This is why you
might occasionally encounter an error when copying a file with a very long
file name to a location that has a longer path than its current location.

 

[Alejandro]

that is a great news, lets hope WinFS project dont get's dropped

 

[nicholas hall]

WinFS is now .net3

NIK

that is a great news, lets hope WinFS project dont get's dropped

 

[ray]

Hi, I posted this question some time ago with no luck, so I would like to
give a try again in case there are new info about this. I would like to know
the file name size limit in windows vista (or windows server 2003 if
better). For NTFS the limit is 256 characters and this includes the whole
path like c:\folder1\folder2\folder3....\folderN.
I know Microsoft was working in a new file system and was planning to
include it with Vista but later they removed the proyect from Vista, this
file system was SQL-based and I suppose the limit for the file names would
be greatly increased...but now I dont know.
Any info?
Thanks!
Alejandro.

According to wikipedia, most modern filesystems have a limit of 256
characters (+- a few) - the one notable exception being the Reiserfs file
system for Linux which has a limit of 4032. You might do a web search to
see if there is an MS driver for Reiser - that would solve your problem.

 

[Alejandro]

do you mean that WinFS object types are included in .net 3 ?

 

[Alejandro]

you are right regarding the Reiser4 file system (I read that wiki article
this morning but I missed the reiser one exception). problem with that is
that the reiser4 is not even included in the linux kernel so its future
looks uncertain...

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Today, Alejandro made these interesting comments ...

Hi, I posted this question some time ago with no luck, so I
would like to give a try again in case there are new info
about this. I would like to know the file name size limit in
windows vista (or windows server 2003 if better). For NTFS the
limit is 256 characters and this includes the whole path like
c:\folder1\folder2\folder3....\folderN. I know Microsoft was
working in a new file system and was planning to include it
with Vista but later they removed the proyect from Vista, this
file system was SQL-based and I suppose the limit for the file
names would be greatly increased...but now I dont know.
Any info?
Thanks!
Alejandro.

There are some good reasons to keep file names to 125 or less,
principly, you can't backup to optical even with UDF if they are
longer without being forced to truncate them. The extension counts,
I believe, as does any punctuation and the path as you say, AFAIK.
The latter leads me to want as few large sub-folder levels as I
can, besides making it easier to manage, although I set up my
folder structure for me to manage, and not Windows.

 

[Alejandro]

thanks for replying to my posting. IMHO thats not enough reason to limit the
file name size. I think at least we should have the option to configure the
operating system to increase this limit...let say you have a web server with
zillions of files organized in folders, obviously this is a serious
limitation to the IIS or any other web server. I thought this limit was set
due to performance issues or something very important to the OS stability
and/or speed. I studied OS theory many years ago and dont remember these
details, perhaps somebody could get deeper into this so we could understand
better this?

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Today, Alejandro made these interesting comments ...

thanks for replying to my posting. IMHO thats not enough
reason to limit the file name size. I think at least we should
have the option to configure the operating system to increase
this limit...let say you have a web server with zillions of
files organized in folders, obviously this is a serious
limitation to the IIS or any other web server. I thought this
limit was set due to performance issues or something very
important to the OS stability and/or speed. I studied OS
theory many years ago and dont remember these details, perhaps
somebody could get deeper into this so we could understand
better this?

To each his own, I just gave you one perspective that may or may
not apply to you. Personally, I would be happier if I could get
into the 200 character range for optical as I like to bury as
much meta data about my scans and digitals of cars and other
things, but I want DVD backups in addition to multiple redundant
external HD.

I am curious about what you find so restricting about 255
characters, where you might be exited by a new file system
allowing file names in the thousands. Wouldn't it make it pretty
tought to view them in whatever My Computer or Windows Explorer
becomes?

I was an appplication programmer once but never had the interest,
talent or inclination to be systems programmer, so I can't help
you, except that one aspect to file length is the bit length
devoted to the directory structure. But, in my view, a bigger
issue is Windows current reliance on 8.3 as a legacy backup. I
understand the reason to want to run some old DOS apps, but at
least let me put the wild card characters and other reserved
characters in my file names. I would expect that 8.3 will
disappear by Vienna or whenever this nirvana new file and
directory system launches. Meanwhile, what do you intend to do?

 

[Alejandro]

/thanks again for replying to my file systems issues. well I think I will
just wait until Microsoft launches the next IIS version that I guess will
make use of the WinFS classes included in .net3. this should solve all my
problems. I guess is all about virtualization now.

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Today, Alejandro made these interesting comments ...

/thanks again for replying to my file systems issues. well I
think I will just wait until Microsoft launches the next IIS
version that I guess will make use of the WinFS classes
included in .net3. this should solve all my problems. I guess
is all about virtualization now.

I won't badger you about this again, but I still don't understand
your need or want for more than about 200 or so. I'm not
disputin', just askin'. I can see why you may not agree with my
artificial limit of 125 for UDF optical, but I wonder what your
real needs vs wants are, and how long you'll have to wait to see
your desires come to fruition if Vista is still at NTFS limits,
and it has a life until 2009 at least, probably more like 2010-
2012.

If you want to factually discuss what each of feels is important
and what ain't, and why or why not, I would be interested. You
may have some ideas that would help my own self-imposed limits.
Otherwise, good luck!

 

[Alejandro]

I guess a little debate is always beneficial. Well again I disagree in some
points. First IMHO Vista is not that important and something much bigger is
beeing cooked. Second I dont think I will have to wait too long for an IIS
that makes use of the WinFS classes, otherwise why to include those classes
in .net3?? kind of make you think...
Anyways let say I need to store a huge amount of web pages organized in
nested folders and these folders may have a very long name like a whole
sentence: "This is the first folder of 3000".
Of course I could program something like Windows Explorer using the .net3
classes but still need the IIS to be able to read those virtual folders.
even if I get the IIS I would also like to share those folders in my network
or FTP and for that I need every computer to be able to handle those
folders. So I would expect that maybe some optional upgrades released
through Microsoft Update system could help with that. I dont know maybe I
am guessing too much and the 256 characters limit will keep bothering me
forever and Linux will be the solution to my desires.

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Today, Alejandro made these interesting comments ...

I guess a little debate is always beneficial. Well again I
disagree in some points. First IMHO Vista is not that
important and something much bigger is beeing cooked. Second I
dont think I will have to wait too long for an IIS that makes
use of the WinFS classes, otherwise why to include those
classes in .net3?? kind of make you think...

First I've ever heard of this, hence my questions. What is WinFS
other than, apparently WinFileSystem and when is it expected?

Anyways let say I need to store a huge amount of web pages
organized in nested folders and these folders may have a very
long name like a whole sentence: "This is the first folder of
3000". Of course I could program something like Windows
Explorer using the .net3 classes but still need the IIS to be
able to read those virtual folders. even if I get the IIS I
would also like to share those folders in my network or FTP
and for that I need every computer to be able to handle those
folders. So I would expect that maybe some optional upgrades
released through Microsoft Update system could help with
that. I dont know maybe I am guessing too much and the 256
characters limit will keep bothering me forever and Linux will
be the solution to my desires.

What means IIS, don't know that one, either. I still don't see
where the ultra-long file name character needs/wants comes from,
agin, ain't disputin', just askin', trying to learn.

Suppose you do go to the Max available today, 255, how do you
reliably back it up? Streaming tape, external HD, proprietary
optical file system, other? And, when you talk in terms of a
large, sophisticated network, is this in a club you'r the IT guru
for, a business, or some monster thing in your home(s)?

 

[Alejandro]

This is what I know so far about WinFS:
Wikipedia-
"WinFS was a data storage and management system based on relational
databases, developed by Microsoft from 2003 to 2006 for use as an advanced
storage subsystem for the Microsoft Windows operating system. It has
since been cancelled as a separate product, and some of its technologies
will be moved into future versions of ADO.NET and Microsoft SQL Server."

IIS stands for Internet Information Services which I am sure you have heard
of is Microsoft's web server.
Regarding the backup process I dont see a problem with using some
compression utility before. or perhaps I would like more to backup to solid
state hard drives instead of optical drives or tapes.
The need of ultra-long file names is because this way they might be easier
to read by other people.
And yes let say bussines networks might benefit from this..also if you mean
that if I do some of this remotely from home then I guess the answer is
"sometimes". this is a project I have been working on for sometime, perhaps
I will seek Microsoft's advice, who knows.

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Today, Alejandro made these interesting comments ...

This is what I know so far about WinFS:
Wikipedia-
"WinFS was a data storage and management system based on
relational
databases, developed by Microsoft from 2003 to 2006 for use as
an advanced storage subsystem for the Microsoft Windows
operating system. It has since been cancelled as a separate
product, and some of its technologies will be moved into
future versions of ADO.NET and Microsoft SQL Server."

IIS stands for Internet Information Services which I am sure
you have heard of is Microsoft's web server.
Regarding the backup process I dont see a problem with using
some compression utility before. or perhaps I would like more
to backup to solid state hard drives instead of optical
drives or tapes. The need of ultra-long file names is because
this way they might be easier to read by other people.
And yes let say bussines networks might benefit from
this..also if you mean that if I do some of this remotely from
home then I guess the answer is "sometimes". this is a project
I have been working on for sometime, perhaps I will seek
Microsoft's advice, who knows.

Thank you. I rarely look at Wikepedia because of its alleged
inaccuracies from the alleged open architecture that allegely
allows anyone to alter the content.

But, I still have no clue as to WHY you care. There's nothing
that forces you to answer my questions, of course, but if you are
really interested in what might be coming up in Windows, and/or
want some realistice alternatives until then, it would really
help if folk here knew what you were trying to do and why 255
ain't enough.

Solid state HD? Isn't that a contradiction in terms? I assume you
mean some very large array of non-volital "RAM". I wasn't aware
that the price/gig and reliability was anything near that of
external HD or optical. DVD-R in my town gets down into the 30
cents or less per disc range in 50 or 100 spindles. It takes a
while to burn 4.7 gig and cannot easily be used in an automated
backup system, but if you're not trying to run a business, I
don't see the issue. It is a rare, rare private citizen who needs
more than I talk about above. And, in my case, I only fully back
up to optical rarely, since I am doubly redundant on my externals
and could survive all but a terrorist attack on my bank which
occurs right after my house is gutted by a fire.

 

[Alejandro]

well to the WHY I answer WHY NOT? Why do we humans laugh, dance and feel
happy? I guess it feels good. It is not really necessary to laugh but it is
something obviously good in every aspect and keep wondering forever why we
laugh is not the most intelligent thing to do, I hope you agree.
You are probably right about the "solid state hard drives", I think I might
have read that phrase from some comercial pc magazines, so yes I ment
non-volatile ram and I have been reading that this kind of storage devices
are getting cheaper. Personaly I dont like to backup to dvd's or cd's when
two external hard drives are more than enough, but of course thats just for
my personal stuff.

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Today, Alejandro made these interesting comments ...

well to the WHY I answer WHY NOT? Why do we humans laugh,
dance and feel happy? I guess it feels good. It is not really
necessary to laugh but it is something obviously good in every
aspect and keep wondering forever why we laugh is not the most
intelligent thing to do, I hope you agree. You are probably
right about the "solid state hard drives", I think I might
have read that phrase from some comercial pc magazines, so yes
I ment non-volatile ram and I have been reading that this kind
of storage devices are getting cheaper. Personaly I dont like
to backup to dvd's or cd's when two external hard drives are
more than enough, but of course thats just for my personal
stuff.

I am a realist and a pragmatist, not a philsopher. PCs, like ALL
the things I buy and use, are for specific purposes and NOT for
transcendental meditative enjoyment. I will end my involvement in
this debate by saying again that I'd like to be able to use about
150-200, after that it is all wasted.

Magazines, any media in fact, talking about ANY product, soft or
hard, computer, consumer, cars, anything, will obviously want to
attract readership by announcing or speculating on future
developments that have been announced, hinted at, or pundits
shooting arrows into the air to see where they land.

If money is no object, but it ALWAYS is, one can buy almost
anything for your home computer, including liquid nitrogen cooled
ultra-high speed processors, today's state-of-the-art in non-
volatol, non-moving permanent storage. I started in the days of
core main memory and just mag tape on reels and progress to about
the mid-1990s before I left pure technical endeavors. That said,
there is a limit to how much I will pay for a home PC. By "pay",
I mean in dollars, time, effort, frustration, and forcing the
thng to work right. And, to go into the bleeding edge or even
beyond the envelope, as pilots call it, would require me to spend
more than tens of thousands of dollars, maybe into the $100K
range. Maybe when my stockbroker gets off his butt and makes me a
millionaire I might try, until then...

If you ever decide to talk about what you feel is needed or
wanted in a new file system, in its broadest definition, I WOULD
be interested, but I'm sorry, I don't have much time for pure
speculation on if come stuff I cannot afford now or maybe never.

Have a great Sunday!