xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Problems with mkfs.xfs

To: Detlef Vollmann <dv@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Problems with mkfs.xfs
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 14:18:48 +1000
Cc: XFS list <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <3B7209C0.1DDDE1DD@vollmann.ch>; from dv@vollmann.ch on Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 03:55:44AM +0000
References: <3B71F762.58CD4725@vollmann.ch> <20010809130928.D260586@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> <3B7209C0.1DDDE1DD@vollmann.ch>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
hi,

On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 03:55:44AM +0000, Detlef Vollmann wrote:
> > > In the native mkfs.xfs option list, I found nothing that resembles
> > > the size parameter of the original mkfs command.  I had to do
> > > some computations and give size parameters for the different
> > > parts (data and logging).
> > 
> > You're after the -d size=XXXb option, which I think would most
> > closely match the optional [blocks] parameter of mkfs.
> If I read the manpage correctly, that filesystem would not
> fit into a device with size xxxb, as the log is still added.
> 

The log is either internal (ie. part of the data volume), in
which case its size must be accounted for in sizing the data
volume; or its external in which case you would have to give
other mkfs options to show where it lives, and it would have
to be on a different device.

So, I think you'll find mkfs.xfs does all these computations
for you.

cheers.

-- 
Nathan


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>