public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Volume too big
@ 2008-01-19 15:53 Jan Engelhardt
  2008-01-19 16:15 ` Eric Sandeen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2008-01-19 15:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: xfs

Hi,



16:51 localhost:~ # fdisk -l /dev/md0

Disk /dev/md0: 60183.2 GB, 60183225368576 bytes
2 heads, 4 sectors/track, -1 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table

16:51 localhost:~ # mkfs.xfs -ff /dev/md0
meta-data=/dev/md0               isize=256    agcount=55, agsize=268435455 blks
         =                       sectsz=512   attr=0
data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=14693170256, imaxpct=25
         =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks, unwritten=1
naming   =version 2              bsize=4096  
log      =internal log           bsize=4096   blocks=32768, version=1
         =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=0
realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0

16:51 localhost:~ # strace -e mount mount /dev/md0 /mnt
mount("/dev/md0", "/mnt", "xfs", MS_MGC_VAL, NULL) = -1 E2BIG (Argument 
list too long)
mount: Argument list too long

16:51 localhost:~ # uname -a
Linux localhost 2.6.23.14-ccj63-regular #1 SMP 2007/10/26 14:17:15 UTC 
i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux

CONFIG_LBD=y. Do I need an extra flag for mkfs?

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: Volume too big
  2008-01-19 15:53 Volume too big Jan Engelhardt
@ 2008-01-19 16:15 ` Eric Sandeen
  2008-01-19 17:29   ` Justin Piszcz
  2008-01-19 17:53   ` Jan Engelhardt
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2008-01-19 16:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Engelhardt; +Cc: xfs

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 
> 
> 16:51 localhost:~ # fdisk -l /dev/md0
> 
> Disk /dev/md0: 60183.2 GB, 60183225368576 bytes
> 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, -1 cylinders
> Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes
> Disk identifier: 0x00000000
> 
> Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table
> 
> 16:51 localhost:~ # mkfs.xfs -ff /dev/md0
> meta-data=/dev/md0               isize=256    agcount=55, agsize=268435455 blks
>          =                       sectsz=512   attr=0
> data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=14693170256, imaxpct=25
>          =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks, unwritten=1
> naming   =version 2              bsize=4096  
> log      =internal log           bsize=4096   blocks=32768, version=1
>          =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=0
> realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0
> 
> 16:51 localhost:~ # strace -e mount mount /dev/md0 /mnt
> mount("/dev/md0", "/mnt", "xfs", MS_MGC_VAL, NULL) = -1 E2BIG (Argument 
> list too long)
> mount: Argument list too long
> 
> 16:51 localhost:~ # uname -a
> Linux localhost 2.6.23.14-ccj63-regular #1 SMP 2007/10/26 14:17:15 UTC 
> i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
> 
> CONFIG_LBD=y. Do I need an extra flag for mkfs?

Nope; this is probably that you can't do > 16T on a 32 bit box (core
linux restriction, pretty much)

dmesg would also yield more information about the cause of the mount
failure.

(Hm, argument list too long is an interesting result tho...)

get an x86_64, I think :)

-Eric

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: Volume too big
  2008-01-19 16:15 ` Eric Sandeen
@ 2008-01-19 17:29   ` Justin Piszcz
  2008-01-19 18:04     ` Jan Engelhardt
  2008-01-19 17:53   ` Jan Engelhardt
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Justin Piszcz @ 2008-01-19 17:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: Jan Engelhardt, xfs



On Sat, 19 Jan 2008, Eric Sandeen wrote:

> Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> 16:51 localhost:~ # fdisk -l /dev/md0
>>
>> Disk /dev/md0: 60183.2 GB, 60183225368576 bytes
>> 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, -1 cylinders
>> Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes
>> Disk identifier: 0x00000000
>>
>> Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table
>>
>> 16:51 localhost:~ # mkfs.xfs -ff /dev/md0
>> meta-data=/dev/md0               isize=256    agcount=55, agsize=268435455 blks
>>          =                       sectsz=512   attr=0
>> data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=14693170256, imaxpct=25
>>          =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks, unwritten=1
>> naming   =version 2              bsize=4096
>> log      =internal log           bsize=4096   blocks=32768, version=1
>>          =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=0
>> realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0
>>
>> 16:51 localhost:~ # strace -e mount mount /dev/md0 /mnt
>> mount("/dev/md0", "/mnt", "xfs", MS_MGC_VAL, NULL) = -1 E2BIG (Argument
>> list too long)
>> mount: Argument list too long
>>
>> 16:51 localhost:~ # uname -a
>> Linux localhost 2.6.23.14-ccj63-regular #1 SMP 2007/10/26 14:17:15 UTC
>> i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
>>
>> CONFIG_LBD=y. Do I need an extra flag for mkfs?
>
> Nope; this is probably that you can't do > 16T on a 32 bit box (core
> linux restriction, pretty much)
>
> dmesg would also yield more information about the cause of the mount
> failure.
>
> (Hm, argument list too long is an interesting result tho...)
>
> get an x86_64, I think :)
>
> -Eric
>
>

Is that on one of those thumper boxes?

What type of HW?

Justin.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: Volume too big
  2008-01-19 16:15 ` Eric Sandeen
  2008-01-19 17:29   ` Justin Piszcz
@ 2008-01-19 17:53   ` Jan Engelhardt
  2008-01-19 20:12     ` Eric Sandeen
  2008-01-19 20:41     ` Eric Sandeen
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2008-01-19 17:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: xfs


On Jan 19 2008 10:15, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> 
>> 16:51 localhost:~ # strace -e mount mount /dev/md0 /mnt
>> mount("/dev/md0", "/mnt", "xfs", MS_MGC_VAL, NULL) = -1 E2BIG (Argument 
>> list too long)
>> mount: Argument list too long
>> 
>> 16:51 localhost:~ # uname -a
>> Linux localhost 2.6.23.14-ccj63-regular #1 SMP 2007/10/26 14:17:15 UTC 
>> i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
>> 
>> CONFIG_LBD=y. Do I need an extra flag for mkfs?
>
>Nope; this is probably that you can't do > 16T on a 32 bit box (core
>linux restriction, pretty much)
>get an x86_64, I think :)

Hm, JFS fails too.
But btrfs 0.11 can mount it.

>dmesg would also yield more information about the cause of the mount
>failure.

XFS: file system too large to be mounted on this system
XFS: SB validate fialed

>(Hm, argument list too long is an interesting result tho...)

I suppose it's right here:

#if XFS_BIG_BLKNOS     /* Limited by ULONG_MAX of page cache index */ 
        if (nblocks >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - sbp->sb_blocklog) > ULONG_MAX)
                return E2BIG;
#else                  /* Limited by UINT_MAX of sectors */ 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: Volume too big
  2008-01-19 17:29   ` Justin Piszcz
@ 2008-01-19 18:04     ` Jan Engelhardt
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2008-01-19 18:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Justin Piszcz; +Cc: Eric Sandeen, xfs


On Jan 19 2008 12:29, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>
>> Disk /dev/md0: 60183.2 GB, 60183225368576 bytes
>
> Is that on one of those thumper boxes?
> What type of HW?

A bunch of "VMware Virtual SCSI Disk" in sparse mode.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: Volume too big
  2008-01-19 17:53   ` Jan Engelhardt
@ 2008-01-19 20:12     ` Eric Sandeen
  2008-01-19 20:41     ` Eric Sandeen
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2008-01-19 20:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Engelhardt; +Cc: xfs

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

>> (Hm, argument list too long is an interesting result tho...)
> 
> I suppose it's right here:
> 
> #if XFS_BIG_BLKNOS     /* Limited by ULONG_MAX of page cache index */ 
>         if (nblocks >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - sbp->sb_blocklog) > ULONG_MAX)
>                 return E2BIG;
> #else                  /* Limited by UINT_MAX of sectors */ 
> 

Yeah, I really think the E2BIGs in xfs should probably be swapped for
EFBIG; more helpful error message.

-Eric

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: Volume too big
  2008-01-19 17:53   ` Jan Engelhardt
  2008-01-19 20:12     ` Eric Sandeen
@ 2008-01-19 20:41     ` Eric Sandeen
  2008-01-19 21:01       ` Jan Engelhardt
  2008-01-20 22:03       ` Eric Sandeen
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2008-01-19 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Engelhardt; +Cc: xfs

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jan 19 2008 10:15, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>> 16:51 localhost:~ # strace -e mount mount /dev/md0 /mnt
>>> mount("/dev/md0", "/mnt", "xfs", MS_MGC_VAL, NULL) = -1 E2BIG (Argument 
>>> list too long)
>>> mount: Argument list too long
>>>
>>> 16:51 localhost:~ # uname -a
>>> Linux localhost 2.6.23.14-ccj63-regular #1 SMP 2007/10/26 14:17:15 UTC 
>>> i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
>>>
>>> CONFIG_LBD=y. Do I need an extra flag for mkfs?
>> Nope; this is probably that you can't do > 16T on a 32 bit box (core
>> linux restriction, pretty much)
>> get an x86_64, I think :)
> 
> Hm, JFS fails too.
> But btrfs 0.11 can mount it.

It's possible that btrfs can cope with this somehow - but also quite
possible that it's just missing the right checks :)

-Eric

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: Volume too big
  2008-01-19 20:41     ` Eric Sandeen
@ 2008-01-19 21:01       ` Jan Engelhardt
  2008-01-19 21:26         ` Eric Sandeen
  2008-01-20 22:03       ` Eric Sandeen
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2008-01-19 21:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: xfs


On Jan 19 2008 14:41, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Jan 19 2008 10:15, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>>> 16:51 localhost:~ # strace -e mount mount /dev/md0 /mnt
>>>> mount("/dev/md0", "/mnt", "xfs", MS_MGC_VAL, NULL) = -1 E2BIG (Argument 
>>>> list too long)
>>>> mount: Argument list too long
>>>>
>>>> 16:51 localhost:~ # uname -a
>>>> Linux localhost 2.6.23.14-ccj63-regular #1 SMP 2007/10/26 14:17:15 UTC 
>>>> i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
>>>>
>>>> CONFIG_LBD=y. Do I need an extra flag for mkfs?
>>> Nope; this is probably that you can't do > 16T on a 32 bit box (core
>>> linux restriction, pretty much)
>>> get an x86_64, I think :)
>> 
>> Hm, JFS fails too.
>> But btrfs 0.11 can mount it.
>
>It's possible that btrfs can cope with this somehow - but also quite
>possible that it's just missing the right checks :)
>
I am not sure why Linux would be limited to 16 TB. If LBD is on,
things are 64 bit, so I would expect to have at least access to
2 exabyte.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: Volume too big
  2008-01-19 21:01       ` Jan Engelhardt
@ 2008-01-19 21:26         ` Eric Sandeen
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2008-01-19 21:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Engelhardt; +Cc: xfs

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jan 19 2008 14:41, Eric Sandeen wrote:

>> It's possible that btrfs can cope with this somehow - but also quite
>> possible that it's just missing the right checks :)
>>
> I am not sure why Linux would be limited to 16 TB. If LBD is on,
> things are 64 bit, so I would expect to have at least access to
> 2 exabyte.

64-bit sector addressing, but there is a 32-bit index into the (4k)
pagecache.

2^32 * 4096 is 16T

So an address space has a 16T limit.

Even mkfs, if it needs to write past 16T (and I think mkfs.btrfs doesn't
need that...) will have trouble, if the device is > 16T - unless mkfs
uses direct IO.

-Eric

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: Volume too big
  2008-01-19 20:41     ` Eric Sandeen
  2008-01-19 21:01       ` Jan Engelhardt
@ 2008-01-20 22:03       ` Eric Sandeen
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2008-01-20 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Engelhardt; +Cc: xfs

Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Jan 19 2008 10:15, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>>> 16:51 localhost:~ # strace -e mount mount /dev/md0 /mnt
>>>> mount("/dev/md0", "/mnt", "xfs", MS_MGC_VAL, NULL) = -1 E2BIG (Argument 
>>>> list too long)
>>>> mount: Argument list too long
>>>>
>>>> 16:51 localhost:~ # uname -a
>>>> Linux localhost 2.6.23.14-ccj63-regular #1 SMP 2007/10/26 14:17:15 UTC 
>>>> i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
>>>>
>>>> CONFIG_LBD=y. Do I need an extra flag for mkfs?
>>> Nope; this is probably that you can't do > 16T on a 32 bit box (core
>>> linux restriction, pretty much)
>>> get an x86_64, I think :)
>> Hm, JFS fails too.
>> But btrfs 0.11 can mount it.
> 
> It's possible that btrfs can cope with this somehow - but also quite
> possible that it's just missing the right checks :)

re: btrfs...

[15:50]  <mason> sandeen_: mkfs will work on >16TB, but the limiting
factor is the 32 bit radix tree ops on the page cache
[15:50]  <mason> so yes, it is missing a check ;)

:)

-Eric

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2008-01-20 22:04 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-01-19 15:53 Volume too big Jan Engelhardt
2008-01-19 16:15 ` Eric Sandeen
2008-01-19 17:29   ` Justin Piszcz
2008-01-19 18:04     ` Jan Engelhardt
2008-01-19 17:53   ` Jan Engelhardt
2008-01-19 20:12     ` Eric Sandeen
2008-01-19 20:41     ` Eric Sandeen
2008-01-19 21:01       ` Jan Engelhardt
2008-01-19 21:26         ` Eric Sandeen
2008-01-20 22:03       ` Eric Sandeen

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox