Does anyone know what the limits are on numbers of files/folders on an SD card?
I am storing a large number of small files on SD card and lots of the files and folders seem to disappear. It works fine in Windows, but not when plugged into my G120.
I have tested this with 4.2 and 4.3 and with 32 and 64GB cards with no luck.
[quote]// All these length includes the NULL termination at the end of the string #define FS_MAX_PATH_LENGTH (260 - 2) // To maintain compatibility with the desktop, the max “relative” path we can allow. 2 is the MAX_DRIVE, i.e. “C:”, “D:” … etc #define FS_MAX_FILENAME_LENGTH 256 #define FS_MAX_DIRECTORY_LENGTH (FS_MAX_PATH_LENGTH - 12) // As required by desktop, the longest directory path is MAX_PATH - 12 (size of an 8.3 file name)[/quote]
That would indicate that the longest directory length is (260-2)-12 = 246
My longest directory name is only 40 chars long including the file name and extension and null termination.
I will try and dig into the open source code to see what more I can find.
There is no limit on files and folder count. SD cards are picky when it comes to power. Maybe check your power source. Try a different card and lower the sd clock.
I’ll check the power on Monday, but it should be ok as it’s hooked up with some pretty fat traces and has a 10u and .1u cap so close that I can barely get a probe in.
I have well over a million files on the card and am only struggling to read the larger directories. The smaller directories work fine.
@ Mike - thanks. I have read conflicting information on these limits. The conclusion I am coming to is that some FAT32 implimentations support more than others. Windows 7 certainly doesn’t seem to have any issues, but it would not surprise me if Netmf had an implementation closer to the original FAT32 spec. I guess the solution will be to organise my files in a different way. Either by breaking up the overpopulated folders into more less populated one’s and or combining files into larger units.
Beleive me, if I didn’t need them I wouldn’t be doing it.
The simplistic storage structure I’m currently using is very performant and easy to manage. More complex structures will be slower and requires a lot more coding. Plus it takes an age to convert the data into a different format. It does look increasingly unavoidable however.
I’ll need to do more tests when I’m back in the office, but I think it’s falling over at around the 1 or 2 thousand folders within folders and not even near the 65535 limit. I’m using a long filename for my root folder and I am wondering if this is exasabating the problem.