search for: large_files

I recently ran into an issue where I couldn't create a file larger than 2GB on a particular ext3 filesystem. I was under the (mistaken) impression that >2GB support went in before ext3 support, and all ext3 filesystems would therefore support >2GB files on ia32. So, I started poking around and found that some of my ext3 filesystems have the "large_file" feature flag set on

Hi, Fedora Core ext3 file systems newbie questions: Just interested in the Linux ext3 features but got confused with "large_file" and "ext_attr". First, what's the "large_file" feature REALLY means? For file systems created with same commands and options some file systems have it on while some not. It is said that the feature is automatic -- If there is a

Hi, I detected a silly behaviour of rsync when new hardlinks of already synced files are created: Scenario: There are a local directory and a equal remote directory created by former run of rsync. Create a hardlink from a already existing file (both inside the local directory). If this hardlink has a filename with comes before the original filename when both are sorted in alphabetic order,

Hello, We have run and stopped by chance command "fsck -y" on one of our raid disks (with ext3 file system). After that we have found that SOME files disappeared (they are not seen in the directories where they have been before). The data are extremely important and contain a lot of programs, scripts for some data analysis and very hard to recover by hands. I have run ''fsck

These came up on dmesg this morning: attempt to access beyond end of device 09:00: rw=0, want=1635237736, limit=976791680 attempt to access beyond end of device 09:00: rw=0, want=1635237736, limit=976791680 EXT3-fs error (device md(9,0)): ext3_free_blocks: Freeing blocks not in datazone - block = 4293394431, count = 1 attempt to access beyond end of device 09:00: rw=0, want=1930439616,

Hi, I have a program that writes lots of files to a directory tree (around 15 Million fo files), and a node can have up to 400000 files (and I don't have any way to split this ammount in smaller ones). As the number of files grows, my application gets slower and slower (the app is works something like a cache for another app and I can't redesign the way it distributes files into disk due

I made a filesystem (mke2fs -j) on a logical volume under kernel 2.6.20 on a 64-bit based system, and when I try to mount it, ext3 complains with EXT3-fs: dm-1: couldn't mount because of unsupported optional features (80). I first thought I just forgot to make the filesystem, so I remade it and the error is still present. I ran fsck on this freshly made filesystem, and it completed with

Does Fsync of a file on a ext3 fs mounted with "ordered" option(the default) result in flush the dirty data buffers in the fs that correspond to previous transactions. In other words, if I keep writing to file1 (lots of data), log something to file2, keep fsyncing file2 after every write - does this mean file1 data would be committed by fsyncs on file2. Please copy me on your replies

New api mke2fs for full configuration of filesystem. Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/ext2.c | 452 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ generator/generator_actions.ml | 18 ++ gobject/Makefile.inc | 6 +- src/MAX_PROC_NR | 2 +- 4 files changed, 475 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git

Hey, I have two identical machines setup with a RAID 5 array. One of them is used for failovers and data from the master is synced everyday using rsync to the failover machine. The data on this disks are usually intranet KB's, DB's etc.. The RAID 5 arrays are formatted using the default options i,e mkfs.ext3 /dev/Xda. The RAID controller is 3ware escalade and each disk member in the RAID

Peter Kjellstr?m wrote: > On Monday 23 January 2006 16:46, Plant, Dean wrote: >> I need to downgrade a system from Centos x4.2 to v3.6 (x86) due to >> performance problems with Arkeia Network Backup and AIT-4 tape >> drives. The backup database is stored on a v4.2 created ext3 >> partition. When accessing this partition after the downgrade, Centos >> complains on

Hello guys, I have some difficulties to understand what really are the numbers behing "df" and tune2fs. You'll find the output of tune2fs and df below, on which my maths are based. Here are my maths: A tune2fs on an ext3 FS tell me the FS size is 3284992 block large. It also tell me that the size of one block is 4096 (bytes if I'm not wrong?). So my maths tell me that the disk

Hi, I'm about to roll out a whole bunch of Redhat Enterprise 4 workstations and have run into problems cloning from the original. Normally I would use ghost (v7.5) because it does a nice job when cloning to a different sized disk.Unfortunately it comes up with read error 29004. Looking around it seems that Symantec don't support Fedora Core 3 (with Ghost v.8 - don't know if v.9 works

Hello, I have some performance problems in a file server system. It is used as Samba and NFS file server. I have some ideas what might cause the problems, and I want to try step by step. First I have to learn more about these areas. First I have some questions about tuning/sizing the ext3 journal. The most extensive list I found on ext3 performance tuning is

On Sun, 17 Dec 2023 20:16:23 -0500 Mark Foley via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > on Sun Dec 17 12:15:28 2023 Rowland Penny via samba > <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > > On Sun, 17 Dec 2023 11:50:18 -0500 > > Mark Foley via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > > > > Spindles7, Thanks. my cloning the

On Thu 02-08-18 18:32:44, Wei Wang wrote: > On 08/01/2018 07:34 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 01-08-18 19:12:25, Wei Wang wrote: > > > On 07/30/2018 05:00 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Fri 27-07-18 17:24:55, Wei Wang wrote: > > > > > The OOM notifier is getting deprecated to use for the reasons mentioned > > > > > here by Michal

Thanks for you help. I also tried adding some other informations as you suggest: I can also take into account: - "Reserved block count: XXXXXXX" from tune2fs that gives me the number of blocks reserved for root - Reserved GDT blocks: XXX But I didn't thought about the FS journal. How can I gather information about it? (it's size and any other information?) 2013/9/16

On 9/16/13 5:16 AM, Nicolas Michel wrote: > Hello guys, > > I have some difficulties to understand what really are the numbers > behing "df" and tune2fs. You'll find the output of tune2fs and df > below, on which my maths are based. > > Here are my maths: > > A tune2fs on an ext3 FS tell me the FS size is 3284992 block large. It > also tell me that

I have an ext3 filesystem that has several directories and each directory gets a large number of files inserted and then deleted over time. The filesystem is basically used as a temp store before files are processed. The issue is over time the directory scans get extremely slow even if the directories are empty. I have noticed the directories can range in size from 4k - 100M even when they are

On 9/16/13 9:44 AM, Nicolas Michel wrote: > Thanks for you help. I also tried adding some other informations as you suggest: > I can also take into account: > - "Reserved block count: XXXXXXX" from tune2fs that gives me the > number of blocks reserved for root > - Reserved GDT blocks: XXX > > But I didn't thought about the FS journal. How can I gather