xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: On RAID, inode size, stripe size (was: Playing around with NFS+XFS)

To: Federico Sevilla III <jijo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: On RAID, inode size, stripe size (was: Playing around with NFS+XFS)
From: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 11:02:58 -0500
Cc: Linux XFS Mailing List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: Message from Federico Sevilla III <jijo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> of "Thu, 06 Sep 2001 00:01:44 +0800." <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109060001020.20382-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> On Wed, 5 Sep 2001 at 10:36, Steve Lord wrote:
> > This is not a raid5 thing, it is a filesystem size issue, once you get
> > above 1 Tbyte in filesystem size then xfs inode numbers (which are
> > really a disk address) can take more than 32 bits. Since lots of linux
> > code, including NFS, does not cope with this, we need to change things
> > in xfs so that a larger inode is used, this reduces the number of
> > addressing bits required down to below 32 bits again.
> 
> So on filesystems <1TB you can safely use the default of 256 bytes?

Yes, also mkfs has recently been changed to do this automatically, so 
provided someones mkfs has been updated recently enough, this scenario
should not arise anymore. At least until Linux support 16 Tbyte devices
at which point the more complex fix is needed.

Steve


> 
>  --> Jijo
> 
> --
> Federico Sevilla III  :: jijo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Network Administrator :: The Leather Collection, Inc.
> GnuPG Key: <http://jijo.leathercollection.ph/jijo.gpg>



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