xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] enable inode64 by default when possible

To: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] enable inode64 by default when possible
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:21:58 +1000
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4BBFE478.3090901@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4B7309D7.5090800@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1270850499.7840.25.camel@doink> <4BBFE478.3090901@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 09:37:44PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Alex Elder put forth on 4/9/2010 5:01 PM:
> 
> > OK, it's been about two months since Eric proposed this, and
> > I'm finally getting around to writing up a response.
> > 
> > I discussed this with a few people within SGI, and there were
> > two main concerns that were mentioned:
> > - This may be a problem for some NFS clients
> > - This may be a problem for some backup software
> > We don't believe there are any direct issues with DMF or CXFS
> > in making this change.
> > 
> > I understand that the change is only in the default behavior,
> > and that forcing 32-bit inodes will still be an available
> > option.
> 
> Hi Alex,
> 
> How will this change affect those people running 32bit CPUs and kernels, if
> at all?  Or is this change related not to the word width of the hardware/OS
> but to the size of the filesystem and/or number of files/inodes contained
> within?  You mentioned possible issues with NFS.  Are there any issues with
> Samba?
> 
> Intel Atom (32bit x86) CPUs

No, I think Atom is 64 bit.

/me checks his mailserver

Yup, it's running a 64 bit kernel and 64 bit userspace. No 32 bit
issues there....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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