xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfs filesystems greater than 1 TB with inode size = 256?

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfs filesystems greater than 1 TB with inode size = 256?
From: Stephan L Jansen <jansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 16:30:10 -0600
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231233390.23629-100000@stout.americas.sgi.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231233390.23629-100000@stout.americas.sgi.com>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx

Hi,

Steve Lord's response answered my question but for completeness
here's the URL to the message I was referring to:

http://oss.sgi.com/archives/linux-xfs/2003-10/msg00152.htm

On Dec 23, 2003, at 12:35 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, Stephan L Jansen wrote:


Hi,

Back in October Steve Lord said in a post to this group to make sure
and use

Hm, October of which year?

"-i size=512" when making a xfs filesystem > 1 TB.  I have four
filesystems
larger than  1 TB that were created without using this switch.  Should
I be
worried?  Is this a performance issue or is there a  possibility for
data
corruption?   Thanks.

He was probably referring to problems with inode numbers > 64 bits, which could be alleviated by making the inode size greater, IIRC. The Linux XFS code has been restricting inode numbers by other means for quite some time now, so as long as you don't have ancient code you're probably fine.

Dredge up that post again, if it was from this year please post
the URL and I'll take a look, maybe Steve was talking about another
issue that I'm not remembering at the moment...

-Eric



------- Stephan


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