* running xfs_repair on large partitions
@ 2007-10-10 14:33 Louis-David Mitterrand
2007-10-10 17:14 ` Emmanuel Florac
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Louis-David Mitterrand @ 2007-10-10 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xfs-dev, xfs-oss
Hello,
1) it would be nice to have a way to know xfs_repair's version (-V ?),
when using it from a rescue disk I'm never sure if I should get a newer
one.
2) on a 32bit system, using xfsprogs version 2.9.0 , it seems xfs_repair
will fail if its process exceeds 4G. Is that right? Is there a way to
circumvent that limitation?
Thanks,
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: running xfs_repair on large partitions
2007-10-10 14:33 running xfs_repair on large partitions Louis-David Mitterrand
@ 2007-10-10 17:14 ` Emmanuel Florac
2007-10-10 21:57 ` David Chinner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Emmanuel Florac @ 2007-10-10 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Louis-David Mitterrand; +Cc: xfs-dev, xfs-oss
Le Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:33:38 +0200 vous écriviez:
> 1) it would be nice to have a way to know xfs_repair's version
> (-V ?), when using it from a rescue disk I'm never sure if I should
> get a newer one.
Did you try "xfs_repair -V" as you suggest? On my system, it replies
with the version...
> 2) on a 32bit system, using xfsprogs version 2.9.0 , it seems
> xfs_repair will fail if its process exceeds 4G. Is that right? Is
> there a way to circumvent that limitation?
No, this is precisely what 32 bits mean. A 32 bits process can't
address more than 2^32 bits, which is 4GB. However I'm
surprised you have this problem; I've xfs_repaired up to 16TB
filesystem (maximum manageable with a 32 bits kernel ) without such
problem.
--
Since we're all here, we must not be all there.
-- Bob "Mountain" Beck
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: running xfs_repair on large partitions
2007-10-10 17:14 ` Emmanuel Florac
@ 2007-10-10 21:57 ` David Chinner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: David Chinner @ 2007-10-10 21:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Emmanuel Florac; +Cc: Louis-David Mitterrand, xfs-dev, xfs-oss
On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 07:14:52PM +0200, Emmanuel Florac wrote:
> Le Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:33:38 +0200 vous écriviez:
>
> > 1) it would be nice to have a way to know xfs_repair's version (-V ?),
> > when using it from a rescue disk I'm never sure if I should get a newer
> > one.
>
> Did you try "xfs_repair -V" as you suggest? On my system, it replies with
> the version...
>
> > 2) on a 32bit system, using xfsprogs version 2.9.0 , it seems xfs_repair
> > will fail if its process exceeds 4G. Is that right? Is there a way to
> > circumvent that limitation?
>
> No, this is precisely what 32 bits mean. A 32 bits process can't address
> more than 2^32 bits, which is 4GB.
I think it's 2GB for a process by default on linux, because the other 2GB
is used by the kernel. The split is configurable IIRC.
> However I'm surprised you have this
> problem; I've xfs_repaired up to 16TB filesystem (maximum manageable with a
> 32 bits kernel ) without such problem.
Memory usage depends on the number of inodes in the filesystem as well.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-10-10 21:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-10-10 14:33 running xfs_repair on large partitions Louis-David Mitterrand
2007-10-10 17:14 ` Emmanuel Florac
2007-10-10 21:57 ` David Chinner
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox