From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: david@lang.hm Subject: RE: Software raid0 will crash the file-system, when each disk is 5TB Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 21:45:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <659F626D666070439A4A5965CD6EBF406836C6@gazelle.ad.endace.com> <6bffcb0e0705151629j78920ca2r9337dccdfc1bb6a9@mail.gmail.com> <17994.19043.771733.453896@notabene.brown> <659F626D666070439A4A5965CD6EBF406B31C5@gazelle.ad.endace.com> <17995.42562.870806.396617@notabene.brown> <659F626D666070439A4A5965CD6EBF406B33ED@gazelle.ad.endace.com> <17995.49602.427417.500049@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Return-path: In-Reply-To: <17995.49602.427417.500049@notabene.brown> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Neil Brown Cc: Jeff Zheng , Michal Piotrowski , Ingo Molnar , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Thu, 17 May 2007, Neil Brown wrote: > On Thursday May 17, Jeff.Zheng@endace.com wrote: >> >>> The only difference of any significance between the working >>> and non-working configurations is that in the non-working, >>> the component devices are larger than 2Gig, and hence have >>> sector offsets greater than 32 bits. >> >> Do u mean 2T here?, but in both configuartion, the component devices are >> larger than 2T (2.25T&5.5T). > > Yes, I meant 2T, and yes, the components are always over 2T. 2T decimal or 2T binary? > So I'm > at a complete loss. The raid0 code follows the same paths and does > the same things and uses 64bit arithmetic where needed. > > So I have no idea how there could be a difference between these two > cases. > > I'm at a loss... > > NeilBrown > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >