[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

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.



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