From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sunil Mushran Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 18:54:54 -0700 Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] Large (> 16TiB) volumes revisited In-Reply-To: References: <20100623004937.GB20090@mail.oracle.com> <20100623013633.GC20090@mail.oracle.com> <20100624001437.GF20090@mail.oracle.com> <20100624005537.GG20090@mail.oracle.com> <4C2942A4.1050901@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4C29526E.9090108@oracle.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com On 06/28/2010 06:15 PM, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote: > On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Sunil Mushran wrote: > >> BTW, have you tested with cleared INCOMPAT_64BIT journal flag? >> > Hm, easier said than done. "tunefs.ocfs2 -J noblock64 ..." bombs out with: > > tunefs.ocfs2: Unknown journal option: "block64" > Valid journal options are: > size= > Usage: tunefs.ocfs2 [options] [new-size] > [etc.] > > By the way, it complains similarly about "tunefs.ocfs2 -J block64", > which puts the lie to the failure message in my patch... > > When I try to re-format the partition without "-J block64", I get: > > ERROR: jbd can only store block numbers in 32 bits. /dev/md0 can hold > 5082795264 blocks which overflows this limit. If you have a new enough > Ocfs2 with JBD2 support, you can try formatting with the "-Jblock64" > option to turn on support for this size block device. > Otherwise, consider increasing the block size or decreasing the device size. > Which version of tools are you running? block64 was added after ocfs2-tools 1.4.2.