[CentOS] ext4 in CentOS 5.6?

[PJ]

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Marian Marinov <mm at yuhu.biz> wrote:
> On Thursday 23 June 2011 22:41:50 PJ wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:31 PM, PJ <pauljerome at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Marian Marinov <mm at yuhu.biz> wrote:
>> >> On Thursday 23 June 2011 19:16:37 PJ wrote:
>> >>> I'm sure many are running ext4 FS's in production, but just want to be
>> >>> re-assured that there are not currently any major issues before
>> >>> starting a new project that looks like it will be using ext4.
>> >>>
>> >>> I've previously been using xfs but the software for this project
>> >>> requires ext3/ext4.
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm always very cautious before jumping onto a new FS, (new in the
>> >>> sense it is officially supported now)
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks in advance!
>> >>
>> >> I'm running some 50 servers with ext4 each server has 2x15TB ext4
>> >> partitions. I haven't had an issue with that setup. The first server
>> >> was setup 3 years ago. It is quite faster then XFS in terms of write
>> >> performance and thus far reliable without any major problem.
>> >>
>> >> Keep in mind that user land tools are limited and the biggest partition
>> >> you can create with them at the moment is 16TB. You can recompile the
>> >> tools and remove this limitation if that is a problem for you.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Marian Marinov
>> >
>> > Thanks for all the great replies everyone.
>> >
>> > I've got an 18TB partition - the limit is 16TB even in x86_64?
>>
>> Answering my own question yes, 16TB is the limit.
>> Has anyone here successfully compiled their own version of e2fsprogs
>> that works over 16TB?
>>
>> Looking at https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Ext4_Howto it says:
>> "The code to create file systems bigger than 16 TiB is, at the time of
>> writing this article, not in any stable release of e2fsprogs. It will
>> be in future releases."
>>
>> Not sure if the wiki is out of date or not...
>
> What I have seen is only a alpha/beta quality code that adds this
> functionality.
>
> I would not suggest that you use those patches. At least not on a production
> machine. I only wanted to mention that there is such code... not that it is
> actually working :)
>
> Marian
>>
>> Thanks!

Thanks Marian, it looks like it's 2 x 9TB partitions for me, what a
pain in the ass!