| To: | James Rich <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: using lseek() on large files |
| From: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 8 Apr 2003 05:52:56 +1000 |
| Cc: | XFS mailing list <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.50.0304071343430.30028-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from james@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 01:46:43PM -0600 |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.50.0304071343430.30028-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 01:46:43PM -0600, James Rich wrote: > Is it correct the xfs supports file sizes larger than can be addressed by > lseek()? lseek() uses a long as the offset, which on my system is 32 > bits. If it is correct that XFS supports such large file sizes, how are > the file contents accessed? And does the kernel syscall allow larger > offsets? > There is an lseeek64 variant which takes a 64 bit offset on all platforms. xfs_mkfile.c uses this, for example. cheers. -- Nathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: using lseek() on large files, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: xfs patch kernel for redhat 9, Florin Andrei |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: using lseek() on large files, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: using lseek() on large files, James Rich |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |