Re: Maximum file system size of XFS?

[Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 3/10/2013 1:54 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

> So in summary, an Exabyte scale XFS is simply not practical today, and
> won't be for at least another couple of decades, or more, if ever.  The
> same holds true for some of the other filesystems you're going to be
> writing about.  Some of the cluster and/or distributed filesystems
> you're looking at could probably scale to Exabytes today.  That is, if
> someone had the budget for half a million hard drives, host systems,
> switches, etc, the facilities to house it all, and the budget for power
> and cooling.  That's 834 racks for drives alone, just under 1/3rd of a
> mile long if installed in a single row.

Jet lag due to time travel caused a math error above.  With today's 4TB
drives it would require 2.25 million units for a raw 9EB capacity.
That's 3,750 racks of 600 drives each.  These would stretch 1.42 miles,
7500 ft.

-- 
Stan