Grading for Question 1 -- 12 points
Here are issues that I would have liked for you to bring up:
Contiguous allocation
- Good for fixed size files, bad for dynamically sized files
- Have to worry about fragmentation
- Has excellent sequential access since the disk blocks are
contiguous.
Linked allocation
- Changing sizes is good, with no fragmentation worries
- Good sequential access
- Bad random access unless a FAT is employed
Indexed allocation
- Changing sizes is good, with no fragmentation worries
- Good sequential access if you cache the index blocks
- Excellent random access, especially for large files
- Not so good for small files
There are plenty of other valid issues like failure recovery that
you could talk about.
The grading went as follows. You got 1.25 points for each of the
above issues that you brought up. If the sum of these issues
added to more than 10, then you got 10 for that part. The remaining
two points were for your examples of which files would be good for
each scheme.
Histogram
