I just read the rhel6 filesystem size limit.
http://www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/
It says 16TB limit for ext4 (same as ext3)?!?! I thought ext4 was supposed to support 1EB ( ~ 1 million TB) limit. That was one of the main advantages of rhel6. After a little more digging all I found was that the user space formatting tools (mkfs.ext4) only support 32bit filesystems (not 48bits). I'm surprised about this, I thought people would be waiting for >16TB support in rhel6. Does anyone know if this is going to change in point releases of rhel/centos6?
Happy New Year
On Sun, 2 Jan 2011 at 1:45pm, Robert Arkiletian wrote
I just read the rhel6 filesystem size limit.
http://www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/
It says 16TB limit for ext4 (same as ext3)?!?! I thought ext4 was supposed to support 1EB ( ~ 1 million TB) limit. That was one of the main advantages of rhel6. After a little more digging all I found was that the user space formatting tools (mkfs.ext4) only support 32bit filesystems (not 48bits). I'm surprised about this, I thought people would be waiting for >16TB support in rhel6. Does anyone know if this is going to change in point releases of rhel/centos6?
I did some googling on this recently, and I found that while ext4 theoretically supports such large filesystems (and you can find/compile userspace tools to create them), the developers don't really recommend using it for such yet. It's just not deemed ready for production yet. I saw multiple recommendation (including from RH devs) to use XFS if you need filesystems that big.
On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 04:49:44PM -0500, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
On Sun, 2 Jan 2011 at 1:45pm, Robert Arkiletian wrote
I just read the rhel6 filesystem size limit.
http://www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/
It says 16TB limit for ext4 (same as ext3)?!?! I thought ext4 was supposed to support 1EB ( ~ 1 million TB) limit. That was one of the main advantages of rhel6. After a little more digging all I found was that the user space formatting tools (mkfs.ext4) only support 32bit filesystems (not 48bits). I'm surprised about this, I thought people would be waiting for >16TB support in rhel6. Does anyone know if this is going to change in point releases of rhel/centos6?
I did some googling on this recently, and I found that while ext4 theoretically supports such large filesystems (and you can find/compile userspace tools to create them), the developers don't really recommend using it for such yet. It's just not deemed ready for production yet. I saw multiple recommendation (including from RH devs) to use XFS if you need filesystems that big.
I think there's a problem at least in mkfs.ext4 etc, they're not able to handle >16TB filesystems yet.
-- Pasi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Hi,
isn't this entirely a problem caused by MBR?
An (U)EFI-machine should be able to handle FS-sizes beyond these limits without any hassles. Can anyone confirm this?
Gruß/Regards, Daniel Heitmann
XMPP: maledictvm@jabber.ccc.de (OTR-preferred) | GnuPG-ID: B251006E Blog: https://blog.horrendum.de | Twitter: @maledictvm
Proprietary attachments instantly go to /dev/null.
"Threats to freedom of speech, writing and action, though often trivial in isolation, are cumulative in their effect and, unless checked, lead to a general disrespect for the rights of the citizen." - George Orwell
-
Daniel Heitmann -
Joshua Baker-LePain -
Pasi Kärkkäinen -
Peter Kjellström -
Robert Arkiletian