linux-ext4 - Re: filesystems bigger than 16 TB?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110627004023.GE32466@dastard>
Date:	Mon, 27 Jun 2011 10:40:23 +1000
From:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:	Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...g.org>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: filesystems bigger than 16 TB?

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 01:35:59PM +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> With mkfs.ext4 from 1.41.14, it is not possible to create a
> filesystem which is bigger than 16 TB:
> 
> 
> mkfs.ext4: Size of device /dev/sdb too big to be expressed in 32 bits
> 	using a blocksize of 4096.
> 
> 
> But I see it succeeds with the latest git version of e2fsprogs.
> 
> 
> 
> The question is: how reliable such a filesystem is?

Regardless of the filesystem or the feature, if it is not in
officially released packages, do you really want to risk your
production data on an experimental filesystem/feature?

> On a system which is supposed to be reliable, perhaps I'll be better
> off with xfs for such large filesystems?
> 
> I'm using Debian Squeeze, which has a 2.6.32 kernel.

On a 2.6.32 kernel, I'd strongly recommend using XFS for >16TB
filesystems....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html