Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:29:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:29:20 -0400 Received: from humbolt.nl.linux.org ([131.211.28.48]:43275 "EHLO humbolt.nl.linux.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:29:10 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: Hans Reiser , Alan Cox Subject: Re: Stability of ReiserFS onj Kernel 2.4.x (sp. 2.4.[56]{-ac*} Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 23:30:44 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] Cc: volodya@mindspring.com, Adam Schrotenboer , lkml In-Reply-To: <3B51C864.C98B61DE@namesys.com> In-Reply-To: <3B51C864.C98B61DE@namesys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01071523304400.06482@starship> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 - 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/