xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Volume too big

To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Volume too big
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:41:43 -0600
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801191808100.4780@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801191650260.4780@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4792223E.7080805@xxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801191808100.4780@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031)
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jan 19 2008 10:15, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>> 16:51 localhost:~ # strace -e mount mount /dev/md0 /mnt
>>> mount("/dev/md0", "/mnt", "xfs", MS_MGC_VAL, NULL) = -1 E2BIG (Argument 
>>> list too long)
>>> mount: Argument list too long
>>>
>>> 16:51 localhost:~ # uname -a
>>> Linux localhost 2.6.23.14-ccj63-regular #1 SMP 2007/10/26 14:17:15 UTC 
>>> i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
>>>
>>> CONFIG_LBD=y. Do I need an extra flag for mkfs?
>> Nope; this is probably that you can't do > 16T on a 32 bit box (core
>> linux restriction, pretty much)
>> get an x86_64, I think :)
> 
> Hm, JFS fails too.
> But btrfs 0.11 can mount it.

It's possible that btrfs can cope with this somehow - but also quite
possible that it's just missing the right checks :)

-Eric


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