NTFS Compression - question

[Spoon2001]

I have a folder containing many email messages (.EML files). Many of these
are under 4K. I compressed this folder using NTFS compression. When I
display the Properties page for the folder, it indicates that though the
total size of all the files in the folder is 2,607,851, the "Size on Disk"
is 5,169,493.

This would indicate that even if NTFS compression is applied, every single
file, no matter how small, will occupy at least 4k or 4096 bytes of actual
space on the disk.

On the other hand, is this "Size on Disk" telling the truth? You may recall
how DoubleSpace "lied" to us about the actual space occupied by files on the
disk.

If "Size on Disk" is telling the truth, I am gaining very little by applying
NTFS compression to the folder containing the EML files. I would do much
better by zipping the folders, though that would create some other problems.

 

[R. McCarty]

The size on disk is probably correct. You're dealing with cluster slack
space. Say you have a 2KByte eml file. It will occupy a single cluster
and result in 2KBytes of "Slack(Unused) Space".
Zipping the eml files would probably be more efficient than compression.

 

[witan]

The size on disk is probably correct. You're dealing with cluster slack
space. Say you have a 2KByte eml file. It will occupy a single cluster
and result in 2KBytes of "Slack(Unused) Space".
Zipping the eml files would probably be more efficient than compression.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

In any computer using any Windows operating system, there are thousands
of files smaller than 4k, and some are even 0 byte. But every one of
them takes up disk space of 4k. Is it not nullifying some of the
advantages of FAT32 and NTFS?
I download quite a few documents from the Web that I cannot edit --
like pdf files -- because I don't have the software. I like to keep a
record of the URLs, and the only way I can do it is by making a
separate text file with the URL address. Then I zip the pdf and text
files into a single zip file, to minimise the disk space usage.
Is there any method other than zipping?

 

[Guest]

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

In any computer using any Windows operating system, there are thousands
of files smaller than 4k, and some are even 0 byte. But every one of
them takes up disk space of 4k. Is it not nullifying some of the
advantages of FAT32 and NTFS?
I download quite a few documents from the Web that I cannot edit --
like pdf files -- because I don't have the software. I like to keep a
record of the URLs, and the only way I can do it is by making a
separate text file with the URL address. Then I zip the pdf and text
files into a single zip file, to minimise the disk space usage.
Is there any method other than zipping?

How about right-clicking the files, and adding the URL to the comments field
on the Summary tab?

 

[Tim Slattery]

I have a folder containing many email messages (.EML files). Many of these
are under 4K. I compressed this folder using NTFS compression. When I
display the Properties page for the folder, it indicates that though the
total size of all the files in the folder is 2,607,851, the "Size on Disk"
is 5,169,493.

This would indicate that even if NTFS compression is applied, every single
file, no matter how small, will occupy at least 4k or 4096 bytes of actual
space on the disk.

Yes, that's my understanding. The directory has not been turned into a
ZIP file or any other scheme that involves crushing the individual
files into one large mass. They are still individual files, and each
must occupy at least one allocation unit.

That being the case, it would make sense that NTFS compression is not
very effective for masses of small files.

 

[David H. Lipman]

From: "witan" <[email protected]>

|
| @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
|
| In any computer using any Windows operating system, there are thousands
| of files smaller than 4k, and some are even 0 byte. But every one of
| them takes up disk space of 4k. Is it not nullifying some of the
| advantages of FAT32 and NTFS?
| I download quite a few documents from the Web that I cannot edit --
| like pdf files -- because I don't have the software. I like to keep a
| record of the URLs, and the only way I can do it is by making a
| separate text file with the URL address. Then I zip the pdf and text
| files into a single zip file, to minimise the disk space usage.
| Is there any method other than zipping?


No. A file will always take the space rounded up to the cluster size. NTFS uses a 4KB
cluster size so a 1 byte file will consume 4KB of disk space. A 5KB file will consume 8KB
of disk space.

This is an improvement over FAT32 on a large hard disk using a 32KB cluster size. A 1 byte
file will consume 32KB of disk space and on FAT32 and you can't use compression as you can
with NTFS.

This is the reason WinXP will always use NTFS with disks >32GB in size.