Feasability of VERY large ext3 file system?

Seth Mos knuffie at xs4all.nl
Wed Dec 4 14:38:00 CST 2002

At 12:56 4-12-2002 -0700, Eric Swenson wrote:
>On Wednesday 04 December 2002 08:20 am, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 12:05:58PM -0000, Basil Hussain wrote:
> > > * Would a single multi-TB file system using ext3 be pushing things a bit?
> >
> > any multi-TB filesystem is pushing things
> > RHL 8.0 supports upto 1Tb per filesystem; 2Tb for certain theoretical
> > setups (eg not involving raid or lvm)
> >
> > above that you need a 2.6.x kernel....
>NOT true.  I'm setting up something very similar right now with a
>brand-spanking new Poweredge 4600, external 2TB u160 storage array, and
>Redhat 8.0.  I'm mounted it as both ext3 and reiserfs so far, and they can
>both use the full 2TB (minus a couple of small quorum partitions for using
>kimberlite or redhat AS clustering later).

And have you actually used more then 1TB of the available space. Some 
things only pop up after you actually start to use it.

>BTW, has anyone here gone through the trouble of recompiling a redhat 8.0
>2.4.18-18 kernel with XFS, and if so, what version of XFS?  Can you share out
>stuff with NFS fine after that?

There is a 1.2pre3 release available on the FTP site.

1.2 is just around the door since no large problems have been found since 
pre3. Watch that space or the XFS website for a release. I'll forward the 
release message here when it is.

It might just be your lucky day, if you only knew.

More information about the Linux-PowerEdge mailing list