Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 12:48:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 12:48:34 -0500 Received: from h24-65-193-28.cg.shawcable.net ([24.65.193.28]:59128 "EHLO webber.adilger.int") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 12:48:25 -0500 From: Andreas Dilger Message-Id: <200103261747.f2QHlEX19564@webber.adilger.int> Subject: Re: 64-bit block sizes on 32-bit systems In-Reply-To: <20010326181803.F31126@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> from Matthew Wilcox at "Mar 26, 2001 06:18:03 pm" To: Matthew Wilcox Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:47:13 -0700 (MST) CC: LA Walsh , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL66 (25)] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Matthew Wilcox writes: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 08:39:21AM -0800, LA Walsh wrote: > > I vaguely remember a discussion about this a few months back. > > If I remember, the reasoning was it would unnecessarily slow > > down smaller systems that would never have block devices in > > the 4-28T range attached. > > 4k page size * 2GB = 8TB. > > i consider it much more likely on such systems that the page size will > be increased to maybe 16 or 64k which would give us 32TB or 128TB. > > personally, i'm going to see what the situation looks like in 5 years time > and try to solve the problem then. What do you mean by problems 5 years down the road? The real issue is that this 32-bit block count limit affects composite devices like MD RAID and LVM today, not just individual disks. There have been several postings I have seen with people having a problem _today_ with a 2TB limit on devices. There is some hope with LVM (and MD I suspect as well), that it could do blocksize remapping, so it appears to be a 4k sector device, but remaps to 512-byte sector disks underneath. This _should_ give us an upper limit of 16TB, assuming 32-bit unsigned ints for block numbers. Of course, you would need to only do 4kB block I/O on top of these devices (not much of an issue for such large devices). Still, this is just a stop-gap measure because next year people will want > 16TB devices, and there won't be an easy way to do this. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto, \ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?" http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert - 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/