xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2 Terabyte File System Size Limitation

To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@xxxxxxxxxx>, Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 2 Terabyte File System Size Limitation
From: "William L. Jones" <jones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 16:18:07 -0500
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, "Davida, Joe" <Joe_Davida@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Tweedie <sct@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20000904173702.K12913@redhat.com>
References: <39AFC301.90EEC7D0@thebarn.com> <09D1E9BD9C30D311919200A0C9DD5C2C02536F84@mcaexc01.msj.maxtor.com> <20000901141936.A10785@gruyere.muc.suse.de> <39AFBB10.48C59783@thebarn.com> <20000901163556.A14222@gruyere.muc.suse.de> <39AFC301.90EEC7D0@thebarn.com>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
At 05:37 PM 9/4/00 +0100, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
Hi,

On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 09:53:54AM -0500, Russell Cattelan wrote:

> So I haven't gone and actually looked at code but given the only way to get to
> 16TB is through a volume manager, the process or re-mapping requests
> will bring any individual device under the 2^40 limit but still allow indexing at
> the ll_rw_block level up to 16TB.


No.  LVMs still get passed 512-byte indexed requests.  A LVM exports a
block device, and that block device is just as much subject to the 2TB
limit as the physical block devices underneath it are.  The fact that
the LVM device is a virtual device, not a physical one, does not make
a difference, sadly.

Cheers,
 Stephen

My haed hurts. Your are right. Just when I figured out how make a large XFS file system.


Bill Jones

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