| To: | Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: xfs and reiserfs |
| From: | Jason Walker <unseen@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:46:09 -0500 (EST) |
| Cc: | Mark Hounschell <markh@xxxxxxxxxx>, Florin Andrei <florin@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Comments: | SoVerNet Verification (on pike.sover.net) [192.168.1.3] from pm1a20.stj.sover.net [209.198.94.20] 209.198.94.20 Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:48:06 -0500 (EST) |
| In-reply-to: | <200101221903.f0MJ3gB13609@jen.americas.sgi.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Steve Lord wrote:
> Not quite true, the vfs allows file sizes much larger than this, file offset
> calculations and size fields are 64 bit. There are some limitations in other
> areas such as a device size limitation of 2 Tbytes - which should not be a
> practical problem for most people.
ahh, ok then. it was to my understanding that VFS was 32 bit on 32 bit
arch's. Thank you for clearing that up, I stand corrected.
RegEx
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | BUG 813113 - kswapd issues, ananth@xxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS starvation, Rajagopal Ananthanarayanan |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: xfs and reiserfs, Steve Lord |
| Next by Thread: | Re: xfs and reiserfs, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |