Why does the 260 character path length limit exist in Windows?

I have come up against this problem a few times at inopportune moments:

• Trying to work on open source Java projects with deep paths
• Storing deep Fitnesse wiki trees in source control
• An error trying to use Bazaar to import my source control tree

Why does this limit exist?

Why hasn't it been removed yet?

How do you cope with the path limit? And no, switching to Linux or Mac OS X is not a valid answer to this question ;)

Solution 1:

Quoting this article https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/desktop/FileIO/naming-a-file#maximum-path-length-limitation

Maximum Path Length Limitation

In the Windows API (with some exceptions discussed in the following paragraphs), the maximum length for a path is MAX_PATH, which is defined as 260 characters. A local path is structured in the following order: drive letter, colon, backslash, name components separated by backslashes, and a terminating null character. For example, the maximum path on drive D is "D:\some 256-character path string<NUL>" where "<NUL>" represents the invisible terminating null character for the current system codepage. (The characters < > are used here for visual clarity and cannot be part of a valid path string.)

Now we see that it is 1+2+256+1 or [drive][:\][path][null] = 260. One could assume that 256 is a reasonable fixed string length from the DOS days. And going back to the DOS APIs we realize that the system tracked the current path per drive, and we have 26 (32 with symbols) maximum drives (and current directories).

The INT 0x21 AH=0x47 says “This function returns the path description without the drive letter and the initial backslash.” So we see that the system stores the CWD as a pair (drive, path) and you ask for the path by specifying the drive (1=A, 2=B, …), if you specify a 0 then it assumes the path for the drive returned by INT 0x21 AH=0x15 AL=0x19. So now we know why it is 260 and not 256, because those 4 bytes are not stored in the path string.

Why a 256 byte path string, because 640K is enough RAM.

Solution 2:

This is not strictly true as the NTFS filesystem supports paths up to 32k characters. You can use the win32 api and "\\?\" prefix the path to use greater than 260 characters.

A detailed explanation of long path from the .Net BCL team blog.
A small excerpt highlights the issue with long paths

Another concern is inconsistent behavior that would result by exposing long path support. Long paths with the \\?\ prefix can be used in most of the file-related Windows APIs, but not all Windows APIs. For example, LoadLibrary, which maps a module into the address of the calling process, fails if the file name is longer than MAX_PATH. So this means MoveFile will let you move a DLL to a location such that its path is longer than 260 characters, but when you try to load the DLL, it would fail. There are similar examples throughout the Windows APIs; some workarounds exist, but they are on a case-by-case basis.

Solution 3:

The question is why does the limitation still exist. Surely modern Windows can increase the side of MAX_PATH to allow longer paths. Why has the limitation not been removed?

• The reason it cannot be removed is that Windows promised it would never change.

Through API contract, Windows has guaranteed all applications that the standard file APIs will never return a path longer than 260 characters.

Consider the following correct code:

WIN32_FIND_DATA findData;

FindFirstFile("C:\Contoso\*", ref findData);

Windows guaranteed my program that it would populate my WIN32_FIND_DATA structure:

WIN32_FIND_DATA {
   DWORD    dwFileAttributes;
   FILETIME ftCreationTime;
   FILETIME ftLastAccessTime;
   FILETIME ftLastWriteTime;
   //...
   TCHAR    cFileName[MAX_PATH];
   //..
}

My application didn't declare the value of the constant MAX_PATH, the Windows API did. My application used that defined value.

My structure is correctly defined, and only allocates 592 bytes total. That means that i am only able to receive a filename that is less than 260 characters. Windows promised me that if i wrote my application correctly, my application would continue to work in the future.

If Windows were to allow filenames longer than 260 characters then my existing application (which used the correct API correctly) would fail.

For anyone calling for Microsoft to change the MAX_PATH constant, they first need to ensure that no existing application fails. For example, i still own and use a Windows application that was written to run on Windows 3.11. It still runs on 64-bit Windows 10. That is what backwards compatibility gets you.

Microsoft did create a way to use the full 32,768 path names; but they had to create a new API contract to do it. For one, you should use the Shell API to enumerate files (as not all files exist on a hard drive or network share).

But they also have to not break existing user applications. The vast majority of applications do not use the shell api for file work. Everyone just calls FindFirstFile/FindNextFile and calls it a day.