Jump to content

APFS on hackintosh with disk hdd

Nila

By Nila,
in OSx86 10.13 (High Sierra)

 Share
61 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

Where did you get that you need some Apple firmware to use APFS?

 

 

From where exactly did get the information that you need some Apple firmware to use APFS for "security, stability and error correction"?  Because I am starting to see this claim in some comments but there's no a source to confirm that.

 

For instance, Apple is not really  relying on the file system for data integrity, they are simply relying on the built in ECC features of their data storage devices. Meaning that you don't need their firmware for that, you just need a good storage device with high quality ECC. Which is true for any device regardless of the file system anyway.

 

Look here: https://pikeralpha.w.../do-i-use-apfs/ this is the link that I think you missed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
freesby
freesby
Posted
Posted

Look here: https://pikeralpha.w.../do-i-use-apfs/ this is the link that I think you missed.

 

Eh, He is just saying that Apple will implement ECC in their storage devices, but that's exactly what any other third party solid state device does. ECC is quite standard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_drive#Controller. So standard that most vendors don't even mention it. https://www.kingston.com/us/ssd/data-protection

 

Apple is simply saying that their storage devices are so good that they won't even bother with implementing data checksum with their apfs.

 

BTW, the command "cp" does not create a clone  of the file, (Hint: Finder does). So, that's not a good example of what he is trying to convey. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

Well at this time there are lots of speculations on the whole APFS format and there's not a lot of case studies available, for instance I just recently found a way to make APFS useful on a mechanical HDD which wasn't possible before (at least not for me ) and I haven't heard from other guys that much to confirm the performance and stability of the APFS, at least not yet so I think until we know more we might wanna be more careful with using APFS for daily use.

 

So I will be appreciated if you have any more articles on the subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
freesby
freesby
Posted
Posted

Well at this time there are lots of speculations on the whole APFS format and there's not a lot of case studies available, for instance I just recently found a way to make APFS useful on a mechanical HDD which wasn't possible before (at least not for me ) and I haven't heard from other guys that much to confirm the performance and stability of the APFS, at least not yet so I think until we know more we might wanna be more careful with using APFS for daily use.

 

So I will be appreciated if you have any more articles on the subject.

 

This is a very good article about APFS. http://dtrace.org/blogs/ahl/2016/06/19/apfs-part1. An actual review with first hand accounts from Apple developers who created apfs. For daily use apfs is just fine, but if you are truly worried about your data then use more appropriate storage solutions. First step is to grab a good and reliable SSD or HDD with strong and bug free ECC firmware (which is what Apple is claiming with their devices and firmware). 

 

I would assume that the APFS  itself must be ready for daily use, since it is already shipped  with iOS , tvOS 10.2, and watchOS 3.2, which represent millions of devices that people is using daily. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

Well the article is so thorough I've read it and there's a lot of great details about the APFS. Thanks you.

IMHO like I said, with any new device or any new technology there will be lots of debates and speculations until we test it fully and/or adopt using on daily basis and find out more about its capabilities and limits, only the time will tell.

 

I personally haven't started using macOS High Sierra for the day to day tasks because I'm waiting for the final release but on my test gear I started using APFS on a HDD just to see how it performs and to learn more about it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
surfinchina
surfinchina
Posted
Posted

Well the article is so thorough I've read it and there's a lot of great details about the APFS. Thanks you.

IMHO like I said, with any new device or any new technology there will be lots of debates and speculations until we test it fully and/or adopt using on daily basis and find out more about its capabilities and limits, only the time will tell.

 

I personally haven't started using macOS High Sierra for the day to day tasks because I'm waiting for the final release but on my test gear I started using APFS on a HDD just to see how it performs and to learn more about it.

 

There's a new carbon copy cloner out for high sierra / apfs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
surfinchina
surfinchina
Posted
Posted

Yeah I've seen it :). I haven't used it yet though how does it perform?

Same as the old one so far as I can see. It just can make recovery partitions in apfs now. I haven't tried that bit.

To be honest it worked before even though it threw up an error. My standard method of HS install was to install on HFS then CCC it to an apfs formatted drive.

Although the last time I did a clean install then migrated everything (with the Apple migration tool) from 10.12

Link to comment
Share on other sites
surfinchina
surfinchina
Posted
Posted

That's good to know, thanks.

Did you get the OSInstall.mpkg error during the installation? Why did you have to use CCC for installing the macOS High Sierra?

I was installing to HFS then CCC to an apfs drive. It saves time when I needed to go to the HS drive from Sierra which can't see apfs.

With the OSinstall error, I downloaded a full install pkg from the net and it worked ok. I used a simple tutorial from our hackintosh mumbai friend :) 

Involves a manual copy of boot.efi

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

I see, but the APFS volumes are accessible in Sierra you can easily see/mount them without the apps.efi file, but if you are referring to access the APFS volumes in clover that's right you need to have the apfs.efi driver in clover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nila
Nila
Posted
  • Author
Posted

I am using APFS on my mechnical hdd for a weak now. In my observation, there is no big difference between High Sierra on HFS+ on mechanical HDD with High Sierra on APFS on the same. I agree with cyberdevs in the opinion that performance of High Sierra on APFS on mechanical hdd is acceptable. In my opinion High Sierra is memory hungry and slower than prior versions of macOS including Sierra in general.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

I am using APFS on my mechnical hdd for a weak now. In my observation, there is no big difference between High Sierra on HFS+ on mechanical HDD with High Sierra on APFS on the same. I agree with cyberdevs in the opinion that performance of High Sierra on APFS on mechanical hdd is acceptable. In my opinion High Sierra is memory hungry and slower than prior versions of macOS including Sierra in general.

Thanks for the confirmation :)

How much memory do you have? I haven't got the time to test the apps on High Sierra yet, but I ran some benchmarks and didn't notice any problem regarding the memory. I have 8 GB of RAM on my test rig.

The benchmarks I used are: LuxMark, Valley, Cinebench and BlackMagic Disk Speed test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nila
Nila
Posted
  • Author
Posted

I have 8 GB DDR3 memory. One more intersting thing. I have tried to copy a 4.96 gb file from one folder to another in my mac (with APFS) on mech hdd. The speed of copy is amazingly fast even on that hdd. The whole copy process take nearly 5 seconds which is much faster than HFS+. Although I am yet to check if the copied file has no corruption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Badruzeus
Badruzeus
Posted
Posted

I am using APFS on my mechnical hdd for a weak now. In my observation, there is no big difference between High Sierra on HFS+ on mechanical HDD with High Sierra on APFS on the same. I agree with cyberdevs in the opinion that performance of High Sierra on APFS on mechanical hdd is acceptable. In my opinion High Sierra is memory hungry and slower than prior versions of macOS including Sierra in general.

I'm not sure if memory hungry here is related to SMC (yeah, Apple changed a lot on 10.13), but using latest @Rehabman's FakeSMC here I get better system performance than previously used HWSensor's FakeSMC v6.25.1426 (I mean on my mach, it'll be different result on another mach).

 

Also plz note that it's still on Beta, there's also an app (plus it's background service) that uses huge memory here: "Crash Reporter" that helps Beta testers to give report to the server. On /Library/LaunchAgents there's also *.plist about logging that safely to removed I guess (already removed here, I forgot it's name). #FYI only  :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

I have 8 GB DDR3 memory. One more intersting thing. I have tried to copy a 4.96 gb file from one folder to another in my mac (with APFS) on mech hdd. The speed of copy is amazingly fast even on that hdd. The whole copy process take nearly 5 seconds which is much faster than HFS+. Although I am yet to check if the copied file has no corruption.

Yeah that's the magic of APFS, the file is not gonna be corrupted. The APFS is supposed to be this fast.

And yes this is only the beta version some bugs are normal, they will be solved in the next update or the release version.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure if memory hungry here is related to SMC (yeah, Apple changed a lot on 10.13), but using latest @Rehabman's FakeSMC here I get better system performance than previously used HWSensor's FakeSMC v6.25.1426 (I mean on my mach, it'll be different result on another mach).

 

Also plz note that it's still on Beta, there's also an app (plus it's background service) that uses huge memory here: "Crash Reporter" that helps Beta testers to give report to the server. On /Library/LaunchAgents there's also *.plist about logging that safely to removed I guess (already removed here, I forgot it's name). #FYI only :rolleyes:

I will test the FakeSMC you just spoke of and see how it performs compare to the one that I'm currently using.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Badruzeus
Badruzeus
Posted
Posted

I will test the FakeSMC you just spoke of and see how it performs compare to the one that I'm currently using.

My bad is I'm not familiar with Benchmarking,  :lol: but I just "feel it's better". To be honest, here's just 2nd Gen i3 CPU @2,2 GHz and 2 x 2GB DDR3 RAM @1333Mhz.. a lower specs than yours, but much better than my old DualCore E5200 with 8400GS on 10.6.x era..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

It's ok ;)

I'm really hoping that High Sierra to be released sooner because I'm really tired of Sierra, IMHO macOS Sierra is the second worst OS that Apple has released over the years and the first one was Mavericks. I never liked these two operating systems, the are full of bugs and not as stable as the other operating systems that Apple has released.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bigpoppa206
bigpoppa206
Posted
Posted

It's ok ;)

I'm really hoping that High Sierra to be released sooner because I'm really tired of Sierra, IMHO macOS Sierra is the second worst OS that Apple has released over the years and the first one was Mavericks. I never liked these two operating systems, the are full of bugs and not as stable as the other operating systems that Apple has released.

 

Funny, Mavericks was quite stable for me and I still use it to run certain programs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

Funny, Mavericks was quite stable for me and I still use it to run certain programs.

I'm not sure why but I had a bad experience using Mavericks but you are right for some apps you better have mavericks handy ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

@Nila

Can you please update your signature with your hardware specs, it would help others to know your hardware specs and it will make the troubleshooting easier ;)

 

My macOS High Sierra is working perfectly fine on my second system in my signature, except for the sleep.

 

Post your EFI folder and I will take a look. You can remove "APPLE" folder and Remove the serial number and MLB info from the config.plist before your post your EFI folder.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nila
Nila
Posted
  • Author
Posted

Please help me, when tried to check my APFS volume with diskutil, it shows fsroot tree is invalid. What is FSROOT tree? After showing that it completely hanged. Just dead hang with no mouse cursor movement. Everytime I did so, same thing? Any idea? When I tried to check the volume using recovery boot, trying to check volume fails as it shows that the disk to be mounted even though actually it is unmounted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nila
Nila
Posted
  • Author
Posted

I dont think so. Because when I check it using diskutil from a bootable usb, it shows file system is checked successfully and exit code is shown to be 0. A green check mark also come in the dialog. So I think it is a bug in filesystem conversion rather than filesystem corruption. Some other user also told me so in another place.

Have a look

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BxpLnq5MpA81dUpHSFJHWVY3cUU

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BxpLnq5MpA81dUpHSFJHWVY3cUU

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...