From: Steve Costaras <stevecs@chaven.com>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: 128TB filesystem limit?
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:28:12 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BAE15FC.2080901@chaven.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100327100618.71e24a0a@galadriel.home>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1668 bytes --]
From my previous experience it's pure speculation until someone
actually HAS a file system of X size to make a determination such as
that. Having run into limits that 'should not have been there' at 1TB,
2TB, 8TB, 16TB, and 32TB when I've crossed each one (different file
systems but all at the time of crossing them have been 'supposedly'
capable of handling it, don't. Most recent is the 32TiB limit in JFS,
granted it looks to be all the jfs tools but that doesn't matter when
you still loose all your data. ;)
I know that XFS can handle >64TiB as I have that running (though made
sure I had backups before I expanded to that). I have not seen a
deployment of 128TiB to see if that works, not saying it can't or wont
just that I haven't seen it.
However from the thread here it appears that <128TiB (just shy it seems)
works and what the OP seems to be running into is a units discrepancy.
Using base 10 on the drives and then having the system use base 2 for
display. This is more dramatic the larger the drive/array and the lack
of education/updates to properly display the units (?iB for base 2 (e.g.
TiB) and ?B for base 10 (e.g. TB)). So easily confused.
On 03/27/2010 04:06, Emmanuel Florac wrote:
> Le Thu, 25 Mar 2010 16:15:42 -0700 (PDT) vous écriviez:
>
>
>> is this just rounding error combined with the 1000=1k vs 1024=1k
>> marketing stuff, or is there some limit I am bumping into here.
>>
> This isn't an xfs limit, I've set up several hundred big xfs FS for
> more than 5 years (13 to 76 TB) and never saw that. It must be a bug in
> df or elsewhere. What distribution is this? and architecture?
>
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2191 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-27 14:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-25 23:15 128TB filesystem limit? david
2010-03-25 23:54 ` Dave Chinner
2010-03-26 0:03 ` david
2010-03-26 0:35 ` Dave Chinner
2010-03-26 2:02 ` david
2010-03-26 4:35 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-03-26 4:56 ` david
2010-03-26 6:09 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-03-26 7:26 ` Steve Costaras
2010-03-27 9:06 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-03-27 14:28 ` Steve Costaras [this message]
2010-03-27 18:45 ` david
2010-03-28 21:17 ` Peter Grandi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4BAE15FC.2080901@chaven.com \
--to=stevecs@chaven.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox