[lkml]   [2001]   [Jul]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 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.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:57    [W:0.093 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site