Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:05:47 +0400 | | From | Hans Reiser <> | | Subject | Re: Stability of ReiserFS onj Kernel 2.4.x (sp. 2.4.[56]{-ac*} |
| |
Daniel Phillips wrote: > > On Sunday 15 July 2001 18:44, Hans Reiser wrote: > > The limits for reiserfs and ext2 for kernels 2.4.x are the same (and > > they are 2Tb not 1Tb). The limits are not in the individual > > filesystems. We need to have Linux go to 64 bit blocknumbers in > > 2.5.x, I am seeing a lot of customer demand for it. (Or we could use > > scalable integers, which would be better.) > > Or we could introduce the notion of logical blocksize for each block > minor so that we can measure blocks in the same units the filesystem > uses. This would give us 16 TB while being able to stay with 32 bits > everywhere outside the block drivers themselves. > > We are not that far away from being able to handle 8K blocks, so that > would bump it up to 32 TB. > > -- > Daniel 16TB is not enough.
I agree that blocknumbers are a significant space user in FS metadata, which is why I think scalable integers are correct.
Hans - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |