public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Padraig Brady <padraig@antefacto.com>
To: Peter Chubb <peter@chubb.wattle.id.au>
Cc: Jeremy Andrews <jeremy@kerneltrap.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove 2TB block device limit
Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 19:13:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CDD5F53.3080202@antefacto.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15579.16423.930012.986750@wombat.chubb.wattle.id.au>	<20020510084713.43ce396e.jeremy@kerneltrap.org> <15580.7052.396951.568702@wombat.chubb.wattle.id.au>

I found the following related graph from Mr. Cahalan very informative:
http://www.cs.uml.edu/~acahalan/linux/ext2.gif
I just might get around to updating/expanding it.

Padraig.

Peter Chubb wrote:
>>>>>>"Jeremy" == Jeremy Andrews <jeremy@kerneltrap.org> writes:
>>>>>
> 
> Jeremy> Peter, Out of curiousity, what then does the new filesystem
> Jeremy> limit become, on a 64-bit system?  Will all filesystems
> Jeremy> support your changes?
> 
> This depends on the file system.
> See
> 	 http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/~peterc/lfs.html
> (which I'm intending to update next week, after some testing to
> check the new limits with my new code -- I found the 1TB limit in
> the generic code (someone using a signed int instead of unsigned long))
> 
> There are three different limits that apply:
> 
>  --- The physical layout on disc (e.g., ext2 uses 32-bit for block
>      numbers within a file system; thus the max size is
>      (2^32-1)*block_size;  although it's theoretically possible to use
>      larger blocksizes, the current toolchain has a maximum of 4k,
>      thus the largest size of an ext[23] filesystem is ((2^32)-1)*4k
>      bytes --- around 16TB)
> 
>      It's extremely unlikely that you'd want to use a non-journalled
>      file system on such a large partition, so your best bets are
>      reiserfs, jfs or XFS.  jfs and xfs work well on enormous
>      partitions on other platforms; the current version of reiserfs is
>      somewhat limited, but version 4 will allow larger file systems.
> 
> 
>  --- Limitations imposed by the partitioning scheme.
>      As far as I know, only the EFI GUID partitioning scheme uses
>      64-bit block offsets, so under any other scheme you're limited to
>      2^32 or 2^31 blocks per disc; some use the underlying hardware
>      sector size, some use a block size that's  multiple of this.
> 
>  --- The page cache limit (which on a 32-bit system is 16TB; on a 64
>      bit system is 18 EB
> 
> 
> Jeremy>   Mind if I quote what you say on my webpage?
> 
> Go ahead
> 
> --
> Peter Chubb
> peterc@gelato.unsw.edu.au	http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au
> -



  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-05-11 18:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-05-10  3:36 [PATCH] remove 2TB block device limit Peter Chubb
2002-05-10  4:05 ` Andrew Morton
2002-05-10  8:43   ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-05-10  9:04     ` Andrew Morton
2002-05-16 19:08       ` Daniel Phillips
2002-05-10  9:05     ` Jens Axboe
2002-05-10  9:53       ` Peter Chubb
2002-05-10 10:01         ` Jens Axboe
2002-05-10 11:43         ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-05-10  4:51 ` Martin Dalecki
     [not found] ` <20020510084713.43ce396e.jeremy@kerneltrap.org>
2002-05-10 19:12   ` Peter Chubb
2002-05-10 23:46     ` Andreas Dilger
2002-05-11  0:07       ` David Mosberger
2002-05-15 22:17         ` Andreas Dilger
2002-05-16 20:22           ` Daniel Phillips
2002-05-16 22:54             ` Andreas Dilger
2002-05-17  1:17               ` Daniel Phillips
2002-05-11  4:40       ` Peter Chubb
2002-05-15 13:49       ` Pavel Machek
2002-05-11 18:13     ` Padraig Brady [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-05-10  3:53 Neil Brown
     [not found] <1060250300@toto.iv>
2002-05-13 10:28 ` Peter Chubb
2002-05-13 12:13   ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-05-14  0:30     ` Peter Chubb
2002-05-14  1:36       ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-05-16 20:32         ` Daniel Phillips
2002-05-14  2:09       ` Andrew Morton
2002-05-14  2:58         ` Peter Chubb
2002-05-14  7:22           ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-05-14  7:21         ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-05-15  9:41 Hirotaka Sasaki
2002-05-15 21:49 ` Steve Lord
     [not found] <581856778@toto.iv>
2002-05-17  0:04 ` Peter Chubb
2002-05-17  0:18   ` Daniel Phillips
2002-05-17 13:32     ` Jesse Pollard
2002-05-17 18:02       ` Daniel Phillips
2002-05-17 18:26         ` Jesse Pollard
2002-05-17 18:36       ` Andreas Dilger
2002-05-17 19:52       ` Daniel Phillips
2002-05-17 20:25         ` Andrew Morton
2002-05-17 15:26     ` Jason L Tibbitts III

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=3CDD5F53.3080202@antefacto.com \
    --to=padraig@antefacto.com \
    --cc=jeremy@kerneltrap.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peter@chubb.wattle.id.au \
    /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