tonyw wrote:You can choose a different storage model if you know the device you are talking to is an SSD. The old FAT file systems were designed to run on floppy disks of varying capacity, so they left all the disk-oriented data and root directory at the beginning. It probably works just as well (or badly) if you use a partition ten or a thousand times the size. If all your meta data (root block, root directory, etc) is in a fixed place, then the disk firmware can make allowances for it and optimise transfers.
Who knows, maybe disk firmware is already optimised for file system data at the start of the disk, without our knowing it? Maybe SSD firmware is optimised for FAT32 file systems?
Certainly USB flash drives (and probably SD cards) are designed to work with FAT. F2FS is specifically designed around these limitations, and it works incredibly well. I've never tried it on a proper HDD or SSD, but I would very much like to get my old EeePC with it's very slow SSD on F2FS. It's a PITA to install Linux on F2FS though, as GRUB doesn't support it (last time I checked).
Anyway, I'd be surprised if SSDs expect FAT layout, as HDDs never did, and there are enough different filesystems with no interoperability requirements that designing them to only work properly with one seems like a stupid thing to do. If they do, it'll be NTFS though, not FAT.