Re: Stability of ReiserFS onj Kernel 2.4.x (sp. 2.4.[56]{-ac*}

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

Daniel Phillips wrote:
> 
> On Sunday 15 July 2001 18:44, Hans Reiser wrote:
> > The limits for reiserfs and ext2 for kernels 2.4.x are the same (and
> > they are 2Tb not 1Tb).  The limits are not in the individual
> > filesystems.  We need to have Linux go to 64 bit blocknumbers in
> > 2.5.x, I am seeing a lot of customer demand for it.  (Or we could use
> > scalable integers, which would be better.)
> 
> Or we could introduce the notion of logical blocksize for each block
> minor so that we can measure blocks in the same units the filesystem
> uses.  This would give us 16 TB while being able to stay with 32 bits
> everywhere outside the block drivers themselves.
> 
> We are not that far away from being able to handle 8K blocks, so that
> would bump it up to 32 TB.
> 
> --
> Daniel
16TB is not enough.

I agree that blocknumbers are a significant space user in FS metadata, which is why I think scalable
integers are correct.

Hans