I need to setup a 3.27TB ext3 filesystem using -i 1024 and -b 1024.
When I try to format this partition I get the "Filesystem too large."
error. Are there any plans to update these limits? are there any
patches already available that I can try out? Or am I just SOL here?
(vzbu2 ~)# fdisk -l /dev/etherd/e1.1
Disk /dev/etherd/e1.1: 3600.7 GB, 3600795892224 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 437771 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk /dev/etherd/e1.1 doesn't contain a valid partition table
(vzbu2 ~)# lvdisplay
--- Logical volume ---
LV Name /dev/lvg01/vz
VG Name lvg01
LV UUID CH5TEA-WC61-oSMX-olxz-sBTf-L1Ho-E1740u
LV Write Access read/write
LV Status available
# open 0
LV Size 3.27 TB
Current LE 858496
Segments 1
Allocation inherit
Read ahead sectors 0
Block device 253:0
mkfs.ext3 -i 1024 -b 1024 /dev/lvg01/vz
mke2fs 1.35 (28-Feb-2004)
mkfs.ext3: Filesystem too large. No more than 2**31-1 blocks
(8TB using a blocksize of 4k) are currently supported.
--
Brandon Evans
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five
hours."
-Hunter S. Thompson
On Apr 03, 2006 17:16 -0700, Brandon Evans wrote:> I need to setup a 3.27TB ext3 filesystem using -i 1024 and -b 1024. > > When I try to format this partition I get the "Filesystem too large." > error. Are there any plans to update these limits? are there any > patches already available that I can try out? Or am I just SOL here?The same patches that have been posted here (or maybe ext2-devel?) to increase the fs size to 16TB are applicable in your case. They are experimental at this stage, however, but as always, testing is welcome. The other question is why you want to have a 3TB filesystem with 1kB blocks, unless you are consistently creating very small files... Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc.
Hi, On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 00:56 -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:> On Apr 03, 2006 17:16 -0700, Brandon Evans wrote: > > I need to setup a 3.27TB ext3 filesystem using -i 1024 and -b 1024. > > > > When I try to format this partition I get the "Filesystem too large." > > error. Are there any plans to update these limits? are there any > > patches already available that I can try out? Or am I just SOL here? > > The same patches that have been posted here (or maybe ext2-devel?) > to increase the fs size to 16TB are applicable in your case.Yes; just note that with a 1k blocksize, 2^32 blocks will only get you as far as 4TB, not 16TB. But yes, it should work. However, 1k blocksize is usually a bad idea unless you really need the very very best space efficiency on the filesystem: it usually performs worse than 4k blocksize, and it imposes other limits such as a maximum file size of a bit over 16GB. With 4k blocksize, a 3.27TB filesystem should just work. --Stephen
Andreas Dilger wrote:> On Apr 03, 2006 17:16 -0700, Brandon Evans wrote: >> I need to setup a 3.27TB ext3 filesystem using -i 1024 and -b 1024. >> >> When I try to format this partition I get the "Filesystem too large." >> error. Are there any plans to update these limits? are there any >> patches already available that I can try out? Or am I just SOL here?> The other question is why you want to have a 3TB filesystem with 1kB > blocks, unless you are consistently creating very small files...The server I am preparing is a sw-soft virtuozzo backup server which requires the 1kB blocks. The small blocks are need for the magic links it uses in the virtual environment. -- Brandon Evans "I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours." -Hunter S. Thompson
Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:> Hi, > > On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 00:56 -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: >> On Apr 03, 2006 17:16 -0700, Brandon Evans wrote: >>> I need to setup a 3.27TB ext3 filesystem using -i 1024 and -b 1024. >>> >>> When I try to format this partition I get the "Filesystem too large." >>> error. Are there any plans to update these limits? are there any >>> patches already available that I can try out? Or am I just SOL here? >> The same patches that have been posted here (or maybe ext2-devel?) >> to increase the fs size to 16TB are applicable in your case. > > Yes; just note that with a 1k blocksize, 2^32 blocks will only get you > as far as 4TB, not 16TB. But yes, it should work. > > However, 1k blocksize is usually a bad idea unless you really need the > very very best space efficiency on the filesystem: it usually performs > worse than 4k blocksize, and it imposes other limits such as a maximum > file size of a bit over 16GB. With 4k blocksize, a 3.27TB filesystem > should just work.I should mention I have tried this on 2.6.14 and 2.6.8. From what I have found, it seems thees kernels should already have the 16TB file system support. Perhaps I am looking in the wrong place. Any help finding this patch would be appreciated -- Brandon Evans "I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours." -Hunter S. Thompson
Brandon Evans wrote:> Andreas Dilger wrote:> The server I am preparing is a sw-soft virtuozzo backup server which > requires the 1kB blocks. The small blocks are need for the magic links > it uses in the virtual environment. > >It turns our the 4kB block size is not 100% necessary for virtuozzo, so I just formated with the 4Kb and moved on. -- Brandon Evans "I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours." -Hunter S. Thompson