xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: False No space left on device error

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: False No space left on device error
From: Jan Derfinak <ja@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 14:52:07 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <429E7FDA.7070307@sgi.com>
References: <BE5986C67D271E4EA72B61F406AB91F29C7C86@sbapexch02.ad.corp.expertcity.com> <429E7FDA.7070307@sgi.com>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Eric Sandeen wrote:

Hi.

> you can use the undocumented/unsupported/non-production "ino64" option to
> force all inodes into 64-bit range, and test them on a (smaller) scratch fs.
> I expect that it'll be fine but testing is good.

Can you explain difference between ino64 and inode64 options?
Comments in source says:
"ino64"         /* force inodes into 64-bit range */
"inode64"   /* inodes can be allocated anywhere */

Is it possible to explain it little bit more? There is no info in xfs.txt.

Thanks.

Jan

-- 


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