File/Folder order on disc

I have several questions on this.
I read that files and folders mixing can’t compute for this “data order”, it’s either file order, or folder order, and folder has always preference over file, is that right?
Now my question is, has level path also preference on folder order?
For example, I go to advanced mode file browsing, make 2 root folders, and then start adding folders back and forth in both folders.

      |              |__folder 2 
                    |__folder 1 
                    |__folder 3

Will finally my data order in disc be:
folder 1
folder 2
folder 3?

And another question, on a BDR-DL the weakest parts are disc borders, right? does it translate to mid-burn, and end burn, data burning? If burning orders goes like; fill layer 1, and then fill layer 2, then I should put the least valuable data just before the middle, and end of the whole data to be burned, is this true?

Clearly some path permissions depend on the used FS too…

Well I use three of them, ISO9660, joliet, and udf25

I think I can aswer myself to the second question.
After a BDR-DL TRT test:

I can see that read speed is lower at the extremes of the graph, meaning the inner side of the disc. So the burner must be burning first up to the edge, and then same process backwards without resetting position.
I think I should then put my most valuable data at the beginning and end of the disc build, and least in the middle where layer switch happens.

If anyone can confirm me my first question I’d be very grateful, I have discs waiting to burn.


Well, I answer myself again to the first question. I created some small test isos and checked them with IsoBuster and LBA position.

It seems only Root folder order is taken in consideration. That means, if you first add subfolder01 to parent folder 02, no matter what it is going to be behind whatever you put in parent folder 01 in the end of the build because you created it first. In the OP example it would become, folder_2, folder_1, folder_3 order.

A bit of a letdown, but nice to know. This is really behind Nero, where you can tell any file at any place where you roughly want it (inner, middle or outside).

Try the ‘Sort Files By Source List Order’ option in the settings.

I believe ‘Group Files By Directory Level’ may also make a difference.

This kind of thing isn’t something 99.9% of people care about or would even think about.

Yes, my questions are from the premise that “Sort Files By Source List Order” is already checked. I read about the second option:

Group Files By Directory Level

‘Build Mode’ now groups files by an entire directory (including sub directories) rather than doing it by directory level. This option makes it revert to doing it by directory level.

But I’m still like before, isn’t that, how as I found out in my above post, it currently behaves (directory level dependant)?
I really can’t answer you on why 99.9% don’t care about physical placement of their files on a disc (which seemingly has an incidence on content riskiness, and hence quality), but yet they test hundreds of media and do their fair share of QS, it’s contradictory.

Another interesting fact that refutes a previous statement “[I]It seems only Root folder order is taken in consideration[/I]”.
I created 2 folders inside ImgBurn, but the creation order is ignored, only the one that gets the first file gets preference for all files inside it over the other folder.

      |__folder1 (firstly created parent folder)
      |             |__subfolder 2 
                    |__subfolder 1 (firstly added subfolder)
                    |__subfolder 3

Final order will be subfolder1, subfolder3, subfolder2.
This is a grey area on ImgBurn that I was complaining on my early days at this forum, this kind of information is not clear nor explained anywhere.

As a self reminder for future reference.

Files have preference over folders, so they always come before them on physical placement when mixed on same path level.

edit: btw I spotted an odd behavior.
Sorted file browser (file browser not build browser in advanced mode) column (per size), added one file, sorted back to alphabetical, added the rest to the build. They get autosorted per size in build browser!! even when I never sorted anything back there only on file browser. And the worse thing is… now it won’t sort by file addition again, even after restarting the application. (this last one already reported bug in the past)

There’s no link between the sort order of the explorer/disc panes.

If it suddenly sorted by it in the disc pane then that could have been how you left it last time - and it suddenly got applied.

Like I said before, there’s no way to sort by add order. It should default to doing it by name. If it doesn’t, that was probably an oversight on my part which I’ve already fixed in the version I’m using.

Ok, some more insights. Recently I discovered that the ibb project file is in text mode, so I could really debug what was happening under the hood.

Yes, the issue explained on my last post’s edit still applies but despite the visual sorting, the build still is in addition order. Though I also spotted another problem, whatever is the sorting in your file browser pane, when you add files in bulk they are always added in alphabetical order. There is little relation from file browser and build browser panes except from the aforementioned bug, :S

I don’t think Folders exist, by the way. They are merely ‘prefixes’ to a File Name’s entire name. Folders aren’t actual ‘partitions’. They’re just spellings added to the front of the file-name that the File Manager uses for Display Purposes.

For example, I have a file called XYZ.EXT

It’s stored in Folder1 and it’s Subfolder2.

The true file name isn’t “XYZ.EXT.” It’s actually “Folder1/Subfolder2/XYZ.EXT”. (And the Backslashes are Operating-System dependent - some OS’s use Forward Slashes, some Back Slashes.)

But the file name isn’t “XYZ.EXT” - the correct spelling is the entire Path Name.

So a Folder doesn’t exist as a physical partition - it’s simply a convenience for the OS’s file-manager to display entire-file-names into chopped-up, shorter, easier-to-read identifiers.

When i’ve used hex-editors to ‘open’ a disk and ‘find’ files, I’ll find sectors of files scattered all over - these appear “fragmented” in my mind, but in reality, the OS and the Disk have algorithms that define their own sequencing. MY ideas of sequencing (Block 1 is followed by Block 2 is followed by Block 3) has nothing to do with the reality of OS and Disk Read or Write orders.

Yes, that makes total sense. The problem is like in this case when folders are considered priority headers. Meaning that the whole file content must respect the folder tree, hence being unable to put (in physical placement) a subfolder outside of this tree order.

I can’t really tell for sure directories are not physically accounted, in perfectdisk they occupy sectors (in fuchsia color), but I’m not versed at that so can’t tell. In HDD as you explained this priority folder tree doesn’t apply, everything is placed in disk as HDD desires, or in my case PerfectDisk, with the configuration I set up.

I wanted to revisit my above post, because it can lead to confusion. If you checked the “sort files by file addition order”, then everytime you i.e. drag&drop files to the build browser, that’s the order it will take, the problem is when one of those drag&drops is a bulk of files, [B]in which case no matter how was the column sort you picked them from, they (within the bunch) will always have alphabetical order, yet they will come before after the previous drag&drop addition[/B], and before the next one… You can always painstakingly reorder them in textmode on the ibb file. I wonder if the same could be done with folders and all the questions exposed in this thread, or whether that would mangle the project in such way ImgBurn won’t understand. I would like to know, but don’t have time now for tests…