On 12/19/2010 02:30 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 12/19/10 1:14 PM, Justin Piszcz wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 12/19/10 10:53 AM, Justin Piszcz wrote:
Hi,
Wow, there were no updates though after Eric's last comment..
Eric, have there been any improvements in the past 6 months?
Or should one still steer clear from EXT4> 16TB?
There is still no released e2fsprogs which supports> 16T for
ext4, but testing of the not-released bits is welcomed...
Ted says a 16T-capable version is coming soon. There's still
work to be done there, though.
-Eric
Thanks Eric for confirming.
With 7 x 3TB HDD its now possible to breach 16TB (16.38TB) in RAID-5 so I
suppose more people may start asking about this.
Agreed, 16T is not that much these days.
As Ric said, XFS will handle it without problem, though.
-Eric
XFS as a base file system is in fact very popular with commercial storage
vendors just because of the size limitations.
Also note that will really large drives, people are also really encouraged to
use RAID-6 (larger drives take longer to rebuild, so you have more exposure to a
double failure that would lose data in RAID-5)
Ric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
