similar to: Block Groups and Large Filesystems

Hi! I'm going to build a maildir-based mailserver with a ~56 gb mail-partition. What blocksize/bytes-per-inode/number of inodes should i use (i don't want to ran out of inodes and don't want to sacrifice too much space for filefragments)? Is there a drawback when lowering the blocksize/increasing the number of inodes (except the maximum filesystem size)? The inodes used by a file is

Hi again, I have the following scenario: I've got a partition which has exactly 14659312 blocks: $ fdisk -l /dev/hda Disk /dev/hda: 28.5 GB, 28520497152 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 3467 cylinders Units = Zylinder of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Ger?t Boot Start End Blocks Id System (...) /dev/hda4 1643 3467 14659312+ 83 Linux (...)

Hi, I have a doubt if I use the mke2fs option the right way. I formatted two different disks, one with $ mke2fs -b 4096 -E stride=16 -m 1 -T news /dev/sdd and the other with $ mke2fs -b 4096 -E stride=16 -m 1 -T largefile4 /dev/sde sdd is supposed to get files between 8k and 16k. sde will handle files with a fixed size of 32Mb. Then I tried this : $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mount-sdx/file bs=4k

Centos 5.1 documentation states that the supported ext3 filesystem limit is 16TB, yet I have a 9.5TB partition that is claimed to be too large: mke2fs 1.39 (29-May-2006) mke2fs: Filesystem too large. No more than 2**31-1 blocks (8TB using a blocksize of 4k) are currently supported. Am I missing something? > uname -a Linux fileserver.sharcnet.ca 2.6.18-53.1.6.el5 #1 SMP Wed Jan

Wow, it takes a really long time to make a 2TB ext2fs. Are there better-than-default options that could be used for a large filesystem? mke2fs 1.34 (25-Jul-2003) Filesystem label= OS type: Linux Block size=4096 (log=2) Fragment size=4096 (log=2) 244203520 inodes, 488382016 blocks 24419100 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user First data block=0 14905 block groups 32768 blocks per group,

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 01:18:54PM +0200, Nikolay Ivanets wrote: > вт, 18 лют. 2020 о 10:48 Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> пише: > > > > When calculating the initial size of the disk we must estimate > > how much space is taken by the input. This is quite difficult. > > > > For directories we used ‘du --apparent-size -bs DIR’. This is wrong >

Hi all- I corrupted my filesystem by not doing a RTFM first... I got an automated email that the process monitoring the SMART data from my hard drive detected a bad sector. Not thinking (or RTFMing), I did a fsck on my partition- which is the main partition. Now it appears that I've ruined the superblock. I am running Fedora Core 6. I am booting off the Fedora Core 6 Rescue CD in

Hi, I made an ext3 filesystem with 8kB block size: # mkfs.ext3 -T largefile -v -b 8192 /dev/md0 Warning: blocksize 8192 not usable on most systems. mke2fs 1.38 (30-Jun-2005) Filesystem label= OS type: Linux Block size=8192 (log=3) Fragment size=8192 (log=3) 148480 inodes, 18940704 blocks 947035 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user First data block=0 290 block groups 65528 blocks per group,

Hello all, I've been using ext3 since it was released for 2.2 kernel, and I've always wondered about the name. Calling it 'ext3' implies that it's a brand-new filesystem, not just a journalling add-on for ext2. I guess I understand that you want to be able to use ext3 and ext2 in the same kernel, but why not make it a mount option, since the journal code is separate in the

>Yes, if you are creating larger files. By default e2fsck assumes the average >file size is 8kB and allocates a corresponding number of inodes there. If, >for example, you are storing lots of larger files there (digital photos, MP3s, >etc) that are in the MB range you can use "-t largefile" or "-t largefile4" >to specify an average file size of 1MB or 4MB

Hi Ted and all, I have a couple of questions near the end of this message, but first I have to describe my problem in some detail. The power failure on Thursday did something evil to my ext3 file system (box running RH9+patches, ext3, /dev/md0, raid5 driver, 400GB f/s using 3x200GB IDE drives and one hot-spare). The f/s got corrupt badly and the symptoms are very similar to what Eddy described

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

--- configure.ac | 8 +++++--- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index da03c9f..7606bca 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -68,7 +68,8 @@ dnl For ArchLinux handler. AC_CHECK_PROG(PACMAN,[pacman],[pacman],[no]) dnl Required programs, libraries. -AC_PATH_PROG([INSMODSTATIC],[insmod.static],[no])

Hello syslinux, I'm a newbie to extlinux, and I'm a developer from yocto project (an embedded linux project). The device or filesystem must be mounted before we can install the bootsector to the device if I understand correctly, for example: $ mount /dev/sdcX /tmp/mnt $ extlinux -i /tmp/mnt Usually, the mount command requires the root privilage, we may not have the root privilage when

This lays the groundwork for setting Root and RootBackup onto individual partitions for multiple disk installations in the future. Install, removal, upgrade testing has been performed and all seems to work at this point. --- scripts/ovirt-config-boot | 15 ++++++++------- scripts/ovirt-config-storage | 28 +++++++++++++++------------- scripts/ovirt-config-uninstall | 2 ++

i posted on rhel list about proper creating of 6tb ext3 filesystem and tuning here.......http://www.redhat.com/archives/nahant-list/2006-November/msg00239.html i am reading lots of ext3 links like...... http://www.redhat.com/support/wpapers/redhat/ext3/ http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2005-September/052533.html http://batleth.sapienti-sat.org/projects/FAQs/ext3-faq.html ............but

Hi all I am having some trouble using the ext2online utility, I have reduced the problem down to its simplist form, and it goes soemthing like this: Start with a regular msdos labelled disk (I have tried lvm volumes): Command (m for help): p Disk /dev/sdb: 18.3 GB, 18351967232 bytes 64 heads, 32 sectors/track, 17501 cylinders Units = cylinders of 2048 * 512 = 1048576 bytes Device Boot

We have a server with about 6x750Gb SATA drives setup on a hardware RAID controller. We created hardware RAID 5 on these 6x750GB HDDs. The effective size after RAID 5 implementation is 3.4TB. This server we want to use it as a data backup server. Here is the problem we are stuck with, when we use fdisk -l, we can see the drive specs and its size as 3.4TB. But when we want to create two different

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. I'm using e2fsprogs 1.23 on a Roswell system with a patched 2.4.7 kernel (using patch ext3-2.4-0.9.5-247) and am trying to create an ext3 filesystem whose journal is located on another device. The incantation I'm trying is: mke2fs -j -J device=/dev/hdc2 /dev/hdc3 I keep getting an error along the lines of "mke2fs: Journal superblock not found". I've tried creating