From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BrOu0-00044o-4c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:34:00 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BrOty-000439-G8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:33:59 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BrOty-00042p-BW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:33:58 -0400 Received: from [38.113.3.61] (helo=babyruth.hotpop.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BrOqF-0002Z7-Lj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:30:07 -0400 Received: from phreaker.net (kubrick.hotpop.com [38.113.3.103]) by babyruth.hotpop.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BDC5B752044 for ; Sun, 1 Aug 2004 21:38:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jbrown.mylinuxbox.org (pcp03144805pcs.midval01.tn.comcast.net [68.59.228.236]) by smtp-1.hotpop.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30A7B1A01D1 for ; Sun, 1 Aug 2004 21:16:09 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 18:28:33 -0400 From: "Jim C. Brown" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid? Message-ID: <20040801222833.GA12375@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> References: <76bfb9d2040801091719aafb43@mail.gmail.com> <410D5D8D.4020102@blueyonder.co.uk> <200408011624.27692.menola@sbcglobal.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200408011624.27692.menola@sbcglobal.net> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 04:24:27PM -0500, Joe Menola wrote: > On Sun August 1 2004 4:15 pm, Ross Kendall Axe wrote: > > Ronald wrote: > > | Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:17:22 -0400, Garth Dahlstrom a ?crit : > > | > > | > > | The next limitation could be your file system if you are using fat > > | with an old windows that is 4G, don't know about ntfs. > > > > 2GB actually on FAT32, regardless of Windows version. If the OP is using > > a 'doze version that's so old as to not support FAT32, he's screwed > > anyway really. I believe NTFS can do better, at least in recent versions. > > > > Ross > > 2GB on fat16, not sure about fat32's limit, but it's well above 2gb. NTFS, I > believe is only limitted to actual disk space. > > -jm > Not clear on what this thread was about ... For filesystem size limits: fat16 is limited to 4GB. fat32's is theoretically 2TB (yes thats terabytes) but most versions of windows can only read up to 32GB (Windows XP can only make a new FAT32 partition up to 32GB but I'm not clear on whether or not it can read a larger pre-exising one). Maximum file size for NTFS is not stated. File size limits: fat16 is 2GB, fat32 is only 4GB tho. NTFS is theoretically unlimited. > > _______________________________________________ > Qemu-devel mailing list > Qemu-devel@nongnu.org > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel > -- Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty. Infinite precision begets infinite perfection.