On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 21:13:58 -0700 Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Feb 26, 2014, at 1:54 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Another aspect of xfs we may want to investigate and get feedback > > from filesystem folks is how well xfs works on 32bit these days. > > > > RHEL7 doesn't have a 32bit version in their beta, so they only need > > to support 64bit xfs. Does the fact that we expect to have 32bit > > workstation and/or server weigh into this decision any? > > I think the only limit is 16TB max file system, so off hand I'd say > no. But this also applies to ext4. > > I just tested with 3.13.4-200.fc20.i686+PAE. > > XFS (sdc): file system too large to be mounted on this system. > EXT4-fs (sdc): filesystem too large to mount safely on this system. > > The same 32-bit kernel mounts a 20TB Btrfs volume with no complaints, > so I don't know its limit. > > http://paste.fedoraproject.org/80784/93470280/ > > XFS mounts with inode64 by default, same as x86_64. So that's good. I wasn't referring to filesystem size limits... there was some issue with Xfs and linux kernel stacks on 32bit linux causing crashes and data loss. I don't know if this has been fixed, no longer applies or just has been ignored by only using it on 64bit machines, but before we go making it a default and shipping it on 32bit, we should ask around about it. ;) kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
