| To: | "Steve Lord" <lord@xxxxxxx>, <christian.guggenberger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: >1 TB RAID servers |
| From: | "Rivera, Angel R" <Angel.R.Rivera@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 26 Mar 2004 07:49:44 -0600 |
| Cc: | <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Joshua Baker-LePain" <jlb17@xxxxxxxx>, "Daryl Herzmann" <akrherz@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Thread-index: | AcQSsnjA14QyntsdQVOS+lM6G173fAAhmW1w |
| Thread-topic: | >1 TB RAID servers |
-----Original Message----- From: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Steve Lord Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 3:44 PM To: christian.guggenberger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Joshua Baker-LePain; Daryl Herzmann; linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: >1 TB RAID servers [snip] Not sure which are supposed to be safe, all you can do is ask around as to what hardware/software folks are successfully using with 2.4 for filesystems greater than 1Tbyte. As you can see from Christoph's answer, 2.6 with the large block device option is the preferred option. ARR> We have some 50TB in 1.4TB chucks and they are very stable. With the large block patch you can get them over 2TB with the 2.4 kernel. We are testing the 2.6 kernel because of read-starvation issues. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [Bug 318] kernel BUG at fs/xfs/support/debug.c:106, bugzilla-daemon |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: >1 TB RAID servers, Rivera, Angel R |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: >1 TB RAID servers, Rivera, Angel R |
| Next by Thread: | RE: >1 TB RAID servers, Rivera, Angel R |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |