[Veltliner]

The folder I am talking about contains 8000 images.

Currently it is located within the pictures folder.

I want to create a new folder, and move it into it, together with other folders.

I don't know where I read this on this forum (and maybe I just mixed something up), but moving folders around too much could cause problems.

Could it?

[Chuckit]

Not really.

[OreoCookie]

No, that won't cause any damage.
Actually, moving folders is actually a lot quicker than moving all files within a folder -- filesystem-wise, you only move one object.

[Big Mac]

If such a thing were true, our OS of choice would be mocked to no end. If you come across a reference to that idea, I'd like to see it.

[Veltliner]

Thanks, guys.

Would have really been weird, although there are really a lot of images in that folder (in subfolders, of course).

Now I know why I had this alarm lamp going on.

If you change the name of user accounts, you can get directory problems. That's what I read. True?

[Big Mac]

No, that's not true either. If you change an account name in a certain way you may end up with a newly created home folder that makes it look like all your files are gone, but they're just in the previously named home folder, and that does not constitute directory damage. Performing normal operations isn't going to cause directory damage. Directory damage happens because of hard drive and OS errors that have nothing or very little to do with user interaction.

[P]

Doing what you suggest CAN be problematic if the filesystem has a strict path length that is not enforced be the OS. For instance NTFS is limited to a 32 767 character pathname. If we invent a freaky situation where you are already very deep in the filesystem (over 100 directories down) and do what you suggest, it might be problematic. Doing it on Windows is not possible (the OS cuts you off if you try - I've actually seen that happen) but that is in the OS. Say that you're running a third-party driver for NTFS on another OS, and that driver does not enforce the limit, then yes. In theory.

It's not relevant here, however. HFS+ has no such limit, and Mac OS X does not support writing to NTFS. How NTFS-3G handles is more than I know. I just mentioned it here to give some explanation to how such a meme might get started.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

If you change the name of user accounts, you can get directory problems. That's what I read. True?

The problem is not because you move a directory, but because you have (successfully) moved a directory and forgot to tell parts of OS X about it. When OS X tries to load your preferences, it tries to look them up using the old path name (before you've moved it, that is). And then it discovers that they are no longer there, that's where the problems stem from.

If you want to relocate your home directory or change the short name of your user, this is quite easy using Leopard at least.

(1) Open the System Prefs.
(2) Select Users from the list and authenticate if necessary.
(3) Right-click the user name whose location of the home directory you want to change and select Advanced.
(4) Now you can change (among other things) the location of your home directory or the short name of your user.

Unfortunately, not many people know about this and they try doing things by hand -- which is what screws up OS X.

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

If you want to relocate your home directory or change the short name of your user, this is quite easy using Leopard at least.

(1) Open the System Prefs.
(2) Select Users from the list and authenticate if necessary.
(3) Right-click the user name whose location of the home directory you want to change and select Advanced.
(4) Now you can change (among other things) the location of your home directory or the short name of your user.

Unfortunately, not many people know about this and they try doing things by hand -- which is what screws up OS X.

Thanks for the good tips everybody!

I'll mark this for my next operating system.

Currently, I'm still running Tiger (still roars pretty nicely, and I like the pattern of the fur)

[Veltliner]

To close the directory damage paranoia thread:

If I have a folder, that contains, let's say, four to six dozen folders and 8000 items, then all the directory entries of all the folders and images have to be rewritten by the OS?

Is this right?

I suppose, as renaming folders is a truly basic operation, it is still save to do with a folder that contains so many files?

[Cold Warrior]

If you're moving it around on the same drive path, it will be instant and it won't have to rewrite or copy any files.

[Chuckit]

Moving files around on the same volume never requires them to be rewritten. Copying a file obviously requires the copy to be written, but just moving things around doesn't require new copies to be made any more than it does in real life. In fact, under Unix operating systems like OS X, moving a file and renaming a file are considered to be the same thing — in both cases, you're just changing the path that identifies the file.

[P]

Assuming that you're using HFS...

All files are listed in the Catalog File on the disk. Each file is listed in the Catalog File with various metadata - name, dates of modification creation and last access, labels etc. One of these that you normally can't see is its parent directory or folder. Same goes for all folders - the parent folder is stored, but only that. When moving a folder like you described, you update only the record of the folder you just moved - the records for anything included in the folder are not touched.

[CharlesS]

There are several ways that your hard drive could become damaged while moving a file:

1. You move a file, and at that very moment lightning strikes and causes a power surge that fries your hard drive.

2. You move a file, and at that very moment someone smashes the hard drive with a sledgehammer.

3. You move a file, and at that very moment a magnitude 8.0 earthquake hits and your hard drive falls into a fissure in the earth, never to be seen again.

4. You move a file, and at that very moment a meteor crashes into your house, leaving only a crater in its wake.

5. You move a file, and at that very moment somebody hits the nuclear button and your entire city goes up in a giant mushroom cloud.

Other than these possibilities, I'd probably not worry about it.

[zykron]

There's also the excuse that your dog ate your hard drive while moving a file. LOL

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Moving files around on the same volume never requires them to be rewritten. Copying a file obviously requires the copy to be written, but just moving things around doesn't require new copies to be made any more than it does in real life. In fact, under Unix operating systems like OS X, moving a file and renaming a file are considered to be the same thing — in both cases, you're just changing the path that identifies the file.

So changing the path is one of the almost failsafe things.

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by P 

Assuming that you're using HFS...

All files are listed in the Catalog File on the disk. Each file is listed in the Catalog File with various metadata - name, dates of modification creation and last access, labels etc. One of these that you normally can't see is its parent directory or folder. Same goes for all folders - the parent folder is stored, but only that. When moving a folder like you described, you update only the record of the folder you just moved - the records for anything included in the folder are not touched.

So it's a little bit like the "history" in Photoshop...

[tooki]

Errr... not really.

Think of it more like this: a library full of books, each one corresponding to a block on disk. The catalog file (aka directory) is like the card catalog, with a card for each file on disk (and if the file is broken up into pieces, it lists where each piece is).

Moving files (or folders) with a disk simply involves moving the "catalog cards" while leaving the "books" where they are.