Bryan J. Smith wrote:
>HaraldFinn?s <spamcatcher@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>>I really hope someone has a clue on this one.... :)
>>I've got a 2.2TB array mounted on a 3ware 9500 controller.
>>I installed it last week ensuring that LBA was enabled and
>>using gpt with parted to get the full size available on one
>>array.
>>
>>
>
>Just because you can slice (partition) an array doesn't mean
>the filesystem will format and/or be usable.
>
>
>
>>I also think I chose reiserfs for the array.
>>
>>
>
>I would very much recommend against that on any Fedora-based
>distro. ReiserFS support is not tested or guaranteed.
>
>
>
<snip>
>
>Er, um, there are a _lot_ of considerations beyond 1TiB
>(1.1TB) that _must_ be considered when you build a kernel
>with various filesystem support. There's a reason why you
>should stick with the distro's kernels (regardless of
>distro).
>
>Any reason you must have ReiserFS? And if so, I'd consider
>SuSE instead. Of course, some things don't work on
>SuSE-based/ReiserFS as they do on Fedora-based/Ext3, such as
>NFS.
>
>
>
>
Roger that last observation :-). I have been having problems w/ ReiserFS
& NFS (twixt a SuSE 9.2 box & some SGI's) for a few weeks now, though
they *might* be calming down a bit (after some apparently prescient
recommendations from TheBS :-) ) ....
--
William A. Mahaffey III
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember, ignorance is bliss, but
willful ignorance is LIBERALISM !!!!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060103/73026e05/attachment.htm
