A cautionary side-note: when partitioning large file systems, be sure to
use parted -- not fdisk, which has a 2 TB limit.
Cheers,
Andy
P.S. This giant table has a nice summary of FS features:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_file_systems
On 07/15/2010 09:49 AM, Troy Dawson wrote:
Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 06:31:48PM -0700, Isaac wrote:
Well, ext3 will supposedly work with up to 16 TB in RHEL5, so SL should
have similar limits.
I can confirm that at least a 7 TB ext3 filesystem is possible. I have
one 8x1TB RAID5 array running ext3 built with stock SL ext3 tools.
I cannot confirm the 16 TB limit. Can you point us to a reference
somewhere?
Here is my information:
I looked into this several years ago when building an 11 TB
filesystem. The SL mke2fs
refused to make an ext3 filesystem that big and it turned out that
mke2fs sources
had a hardwired limit of 8 TB maximum filesystem size. Instead, I made
an 11 TB XFS
filesystem and it is still running just fine thank you very much.
Here is the web page with the limits.
http://www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/
Don't worry about the subscriptions, and assume that S.L. is equivilant
to AS or Advanced Platform.
One thing to note is that this page get's updates after each update, so
these number apply to SL 5.5. You might run into some lower limits if
you are running SL 5.0.
But if you are working with 1 to 2 Terabytes, you should be fine.
My opinion.
I use ext3 for everything, and I have several filesystems that are in
the 2 Terabyte range.
If doesn't depend on how big your file system is, it depends on what you
are doing with it.
Only use XFS on x86_64.
If you are writing, reading, and deleting lots of small files (1000 -
10,000) all the time, XFS is the winner because it deletes much much
faster.
Other than those two comments about XFS, I'm not going to say anymore.
As I said at the beginning, I use ext3 on everything with no complaints.
I plan on using ext4 when I move to SL 6.
Troy
