* [linux-lvm] Fwd: Re: file system size limits
@ 2000-01-07 12:26 Michael Marxmeier
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Michael Marxmeier @ 2000-01-07 12:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
Forwarded to the list.
-------- Original Message --------
Sender: manfreds@colorfullife.com
Message-ID: <3875C6BD.77A307DD@colorfullife.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 11:58:05 +0100
Resent-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 13:21:02 MEZ
From: Manfred Spraul <manfreds@colorfullife.com>
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>, linux-LVM@msede.com
CC: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>, Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: file system size limits
[I added linux-LVM to the cc list because it could be a LVM problem]
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" wrote:
>
> From: "Manfred Spraul" <manfreds@colorfullife.com>
> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 20:08:59 +0100
>
> Ok, so the limits are even more complex:
> * on an Alpha, you could build a 4TB ext2 volume and use it.
> * if your Alpha crashes, and you connect your disks to an i386 box, then you
> could corrupt your file system unless someone has added safety checks.
>
> I'm merely try to verify that these safety checks exist:
> eg. ext2 on Alpha supports files > 2 GB, but linux-2.2 on i386 doesn't. If
> you try to mount the disk on i386, then ext2 refuses to perform invalid
> operations on these files.
>
> We're *way* ahead of you.
I knew that, but this only means that ext2 is safe.
What about the other subsystems?
eg it seems that lvm doesn't contain the checks for lvm's > 2 TB on
32-bit platforms.
* LVM can map up to 128 TB [I only checked the header file of
LVM-0.8i]
* This would work on 64-bit platforms.
* If you attach these disks to a 32-bit platform, you'll corrupt your
data. [but perhaps LVM will refuse to mount it, but I couldn't find
such
checks at first glance].
> The on-disk format of the ext2 filesystem only allows 4 bytes for the
> block number, and it's defined to be an unsigned value. So if you're
> using 4k blocks, the maximum theoretical filesize is 64 TB. (i.e.,
> 4*2^10*2^32 == 2^46)
That's the ext2 limit. But the real-life limit is lowest value of
(ext2-limit, ll_rw_blk limit, LVM limit, raid limit).
I think we must check these limits, and ensure that everyone refuses
to
work with larger disks.
ext2 is OK, but this doesn't mean that the complete chain
syscall-to-disk will be OK.
--
Manfred
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [linux-lvm] Fwd: Re: file system size limits
@ 2000-01-07 14:10 Michael Marxmeier
2000-01-07 15:20 ` Heinz Mauelshagen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Michael Marxmeier @ 2000-01-07 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
Forwarded to the list ...
-------- Original Message --------
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 13:34:20 +0100 (CET)
Resent-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 15:07:52 MEZ
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
X-Sender: andrea@alpha.random
To: Manfred Spraul <manfreds@colorfullife.com>
cc: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>, linux-LVM@msede.com,
Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>, linux-fsdevel@vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: file system size limits
On Fri, 7 Jan 2000, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>eg it seems that lvm doesn't contain the checks for lvm's > 2 TB on
>32-bit platforms.
Actually lvm has real issues as well. When the real issues will gets
fixed
we'll add the avoid-admin-to-do-silly-things checks too :).
Andrea
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] Fwd: Re: file system size limits
2000-01-07 14:10 Michael Marxmeier
@ 2000-01-07 15:20 ` Heinz Mauelshagen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Heinz Mauelshagen @ 2000-01-07 15:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrea; +Cc: tytso, linux-lvm, ak, linux-fsdevel, manfreds
> Forwarded to the list ...
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 13:34:20 +0100 (CET)
> Resent-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 15:07:52 MEZ
> From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
> X-Sender: andrea@alpha.random
> To: Manfred Spraul <manfreds@colorfullife.com>
> cc: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>, linux-LVM@msede.com,
> Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>, linux-fsdevel@vger.rutgers.edu
> Subject: Re: file system size limits
>
> On Fri, 7 Jan 2000, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>
> >eg it seems that lvm doesn't contain the checks for lvm's > 2 TB on
> >32-bit platforms.
>
> Actually lvm has real issues as well. When the real issues will gets
> fixed
> we'll add the avoid-admin-to-do-silly-things checks too :).
>
> Andrea
>
Absolutely.
I'm only checking the limits in the, because the 32bit restriction in the
block devive layer forces me to do that.
Heinz
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Systemmanagement CS-TS T-Nova
Entwicklungszentrum Darmstadt
Heinz Mauelshagen Otto-Roehm-Strasse 71c
Senior Systems Engineer Postfach 10 05 41
64205 Darmstadt
mge@EZ-Darmstadt.Telekom.de Germany
+49 6151 886-425
FAX-386
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2000-01-07 15:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2000-01-07 12:26 [linux-lvm] Fwd: Re: file system size limits Michael Marxmeier
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-01-07 14:10 Michael Marxmeier
2000-01-07 15:20 ` Heinz Mauelshagen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox