On Mar 7, 2012, at 2:17 AM, John R Pierce <pierce at hogranch.com> wrote: > On 03/06/12 10:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote: >> I've had to use inode64 on far smaller file systems (15TB) due to inode counts (many files) and not file system size. > > > My understanding of it is, the inode number is its physical position on > the disk. if the first 1TB (2^31 * 512) of the disk has no free space > to create an inode for a new directory, then that inode requires 64bits. Ah, ok, if the inode's location on disk goes above the 1TB mark then inode64 is needed, but not the data it points to, that can exist anywhere. Problem is that both inode and data can exist in that 1TB and the data can push the inodes into 64-bit land. These days XFS should always be inode64 enabled, given the size of disks, and NFS should have been fixed a long, long time ago. -Ross