* [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB @ 2007-04-10 0:09 Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-10 0:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Joshua Hoblitt @ 2007-04-10 0:09 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1023 bytes --] After reading in the kernel changelog that 2.6.19 should support ext3 filesystems up to 16TB in size, I tried to create an 11TB filesystem. Attempting to do so gets this error from mke2fs: # mke2fs -j -J size=400 -O sparse_super,dir_index -i32768 -m1 /dev/sda4 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. # mke2fs -j /dev/sda4 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. This is on a system running 2.6.19-gentoo-r5 with sys-fs/e2fsprogs-1.39 ChangeLog for in kernel 16TB ext3 support: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=855565e81ad8940cc645b5110ec2c7f124a76d23 Release notes for e2fsprogs claiming 16TB support (2**32 blocks). http://e2fsprogs.sourceforge.net/e2fsprogs-release.html#1.39 Any idea what I am missing? Cheers, -J -- [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB 2007-04-10 0:09 [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB Joshua Hoblitt @ 2007-04-10 0:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-10 21:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-10 7:14 ` Naga 2007-04-11 12:23 ` Mark Haney 2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Joshua Hoblitt @ 2007-04-10 0:12 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1291 bytes --] Ps. I've looked through e2fsprogs configure.in and it doesn't look like there's a magic flag to enable this support either. -J -- On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 02:09:10PM -1000, Joshua Hoblitt wrote: > After reading in the kernel changelog that 2.6.19 should support ext3 > filesystems up to 16TB in size, I tried to create an 11TB filesystem. > Attempting to do so gets this error from mke2fs: > > # mke2fs -j -J size=400 -O sparse_super,dir_index -i32768 -m1 /dev/sda4 > 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. > # mke2fs -j /dev/sda4 > 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. > > This is on a system running 2.6.19-gentoo-r5 with sys-fs/e2fsprogs-1.39 > > ChangeLog for in kernel 16TB ext3 support: > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=855565e81ad8940cc645b5110ec2c7f124a76d23 > > Release notes for e2fsprogs claiming 16TB support (2**32 blocks). > > http://e2fsprogs.sourceforge.net/e2fsprogs-release.html#1.39 > > Any idea what I am missing? > > Cheers, > > -J > > -- [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB 2007-04-10 0:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt @ 2007-04-10 21:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-11 6:04 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Duncan 2007-04-11 9:06 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Wil Reichert 0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Joshua Hoblitt @ 2007-04-10 21:12 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64; +Cc: tytso [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1889 bytes --] After looking through various patches that were posted to LKML, I discovered that passing "-F" to mke2fs seems to make this work as expected. However, this behavior seems to be undocumented and that makes me more then a little nervous. The resulting filesystem does seem to be mountable: /dev/sda4 11T 173M 11T 1% /export/ipp003.0 Is this feature undocumented for a reason or is it just unsupported? -J -- On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 02:12:43PM -1000, Joshua Hoblitt wrote: > Ps. I've looked through e2fsprogs configure.in and it doesn't look like > there's a magic flag to enable this support either. > > -J > > -- > On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 02:09:10PM -1000, Joshua Hoblitt wrote: > > After reading in the kernel changelog that 2.6.19 should support ext3 > > filesystems up to 16TB in size, I tried to create an 11TB filesystem. > > Attempting to do so gets this error from mke2fs: > > > > # mke2fs -j -J size=400 -O sparse_super,dir_index -i32768 -m1 /dev/sda4 > > 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. > > # mke2fs -j /dev/sda4 > > 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. > > > > This is on a system running 2.6.19-gentoo-r5 with sys-fs/e2fsprogs-1.39 > > > > ChangeLog for in kernel 16TB ext3 support: > > > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=855565e81ad8940cc645b5110ec2c7f124a76d23 > > > > Release notes for e2fsprogs claiming 16TB support (2**32 blocks). > > > > http://e2fsprogs.sourceforge.net/e2fsprogs-release.html#1.39 > > > > Any idea what I am missing? > > > > Cheers, > > > > -J > > > > -- > > [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-amd64] Re: trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB 2007-04-10 21:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt @ 2007-04-11 6:04 ` Duncan 2007-04-11 9:06 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Wil Reichert 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Duncan @ 2007-04-11 6:04 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 Joshua Hoblitt <jhoblitt@ifa.hawaii.edu> posted 20070410211253.GA24125@ifa.hawaii.edu, excerpted below, on Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:12:53 -1000: > After looking through various patches that were posted to LKML, I > discovered that passing "-F" to mke2fs seems to make this work as > expected. However, this behavior seems to be undocumented and that > makes me more then a little nervous. > > The resulting filesystem does seem to be mountable: > > /dev/sda4 11T 173M 11T 1% /export/ipp003.0 > > Is this feature undocumented for a reason or is it just unsupported? Hmm... no clue about e2fs (reiserfs here), but -F = force, so yeah, I can see why you'd be rather uncomfortable using it. >From following the various kernel articles on LWN, including some eXfs ones (X=2/3/4), I could strongly speculate that they are doing it to enable backward compatibility. Since the 16 T support is so new, they don't enable it by default, thus allowing older kernels to boot the resulting filesystems as well. If one knows what they are doing and presumably knows not to try to load the filesystems with older kernels that can't properly handle 16 T partitions, there's the force switch to enable it, but it doesn't do it by default to ensure backward compatibility by default. However, that would be simply speculation, altho I'd like to think it's at least somewhat informed speculation. It's your data and your risk if I'm wrong, not mine, so feel free to treat this as worth exactly what you paid for it, zero. =8^) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB 2007-04-10 21:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-11 6:04 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Duncan @ 2007-04-11 9:06 ` Wil Reichert 2007-04-12 1:04 ` Joshua Hoblitt 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Wil Reichert @ 2007-04-11 9:06 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64; +Cc: tytso On 4/10/07, Joshua Hoblitt <jhoblitt@ifa.hawaii.edu> wrote: > After looking through various patches that were posted to LKML, I > discovered that passing "-F" to mke2fs seems to make this work as > expected. However, this behavior seems to be undocumented and that > makes me more then a little nervous. > > The resulting filesystem does seem to be mountable: > > /dev/sda4 11T 173M 11T 1% /export/ipp003.0 > > Is this feature undocumented for a reason or is it just unsupported? Any reason you are so set on ext3? Its fine for a general purpose fs but this might be a sign you are stretching its intended limits. Perhaps something 64-bit like xfs or jfs would be a better option depending on your intended usage / workload. Wil -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB 2007-04-11 9:06 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Wil Reichert @ 2007-04-12 1:04 ` Joshua Hoblitt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Joshua Hoblitt @ 2007-04-12 1:04 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64; +Cc: tytso [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1580 bytes --] On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 02:06:44AM -0700, Wil Reichert wrote: > On 4/10/07, Joshua Hoblitt <jhoblitt@ifa.hawaii.edu> wrote: > >After looking through various patches that were posted to LKML, I > >discovered that passing "-F" to mke2fs seems to make this work as > >expected. However, this behavior seems to be undocumented and that > >makes me more then a little nervous. > > > >The resulting filesystem does seem to be mountable: > > > > /dev/sda4 11T 173M 11T 1% /export/ipp003.0 > > > >Is this feature undocumented for a reason or is it just unsupported? > > Any reason you are so set on ext3? Its fine for a general purpose fs > but this might be a sign you are stretching its intended limits. > Perhaps something 64-bit like xfs or jfs would be a better option > depending on your intended usage / workload. Yes, ext3 has proven itself, to my satisfaction, to be extremely reliable even if it's not mounted with the journal in ordered mode. In fact, I've never lost data from an ext3 filesystem that wasn't the fault of the hardware (disk/controller failure). I've dabbled with xfs and had some issues -- I've spoken with people that have had data corrupt issues with xfs when the system has exhausted memory. For my usage pattern, xfs only gives me about a 10% performance boost and frankly I don't need the extra bandwidth. I don't really have any experience with jfs. At least to me, ext3 is clearly the most stable choice. Even lustrefs uses ext3 as the storage backend because of it's stability. -J -- [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB 2007-04-10 0:09 [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-10 0:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt @ 2007-04-10 7:14 ` Naga 2007-04-11 12:23 ` Mark Haney 2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Naga @ 2007-04-10 7:14 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 On Tuesday 10 April 2007 02.09.10 Joshua Hoblitt wrote: > After reading in the kernel changelog that 2.6.19 should support ext3 > filesystems up to 16TB in size, I tried to create an 11TB filesystem. > Attempting to do so gets this error from mke2fs: > > # mke2fs -j -J size=400 -O sparse_super,dir_index -i32768 -m1 /dev/sda4 > 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. [...] > Any idea what I am missing? Bigger blocksize? -- Naga -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB 2007-04-10 0:09 [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-10 0:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-10 7:14 ` Naga @ 2007-04-11 12:23 ` Mark Haney 2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Mark Haney @ 2007-04-11 12:23 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 Joshua Hoblitt wrote: > After reading in the kernel changelog that 2.6.19 should support ext3 > filesystems up to 16TB in size, I tried to create an 11TB filesystem. > Attempting to do so gets this error from mke2fs: > > # mke2fs -j -J size=400 -O sparse_super,dir_index -i32768 -m1 /dev/sda4 > 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. > # mke2fs -j /dev/sda4 > 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. > > This is on a system running 2.6.19-gentoo-r5 with sys-fs/e2fsprogs-1.39 > > ChangeLog for in kernel 16TB ext3 support: > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=855565e81ad8940cc645b5110ec2c7f124a76d23 > > Release notes for e2fsprogs claiming 16TB support (2**32 blocks). > > http://e2fsprogs.sourceforge.net/e2fsprogs-release.html#1.39 > > Any idea what I am missing? > > Cheers, > > -J > > -- You know, I've been watching this thread thinking something was nagging me about this. And after a night of not thinking about it I remember what it was. I had a similar issue last summer. The way I fixed it was to use LVM. Create a volume group the size you want and create the filesystem inside it. My volume was only slightly larger than 8TB, but it did create and it works great. -- Ita erat quando hic adveni. Mark Haney Sr. Systems Administrator ERC Broadband (828) 350-2415 -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-04-12 1:01 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2007-04-10 0:09 [gentoo-amd64] trouble creating an ext3 filesystem > 8TB Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-10 0:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-10 21:12 ` Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-11 6:04 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Duncan 2007-04-11 9:06 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Wil Reichert 2007-04-12 1:04 ` Joshua Hoblitt 2007-04-10 7:14 ` Naga 2007-04-11 12:23 ` Mark Haney
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox