From: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: Is EXT4 the right FS for > 16TB? Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2010 13:30:47 -0600 Message-ID: <4D0E5D67.6060504@sandeen.net> References: <4D0E3435.30104@van-ness.com> <4D0E3A63.606@sandeen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Sandon Van Ness , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Alan Piszcz To: Justin Piszcz Return-path: Received: from 64-131-28-21.usfamily.net ([64.131.28.21]:60090 "EHLO mail.sandeen.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932424Ab0LSTat (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Dec 2010 14:30:49 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/19/10 1:14 PM, Justin Piszcz wrote: > > > On Sun, 19 Dec 2010, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> On 12/19/10 10:53 AM, Justin Piszcz wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Wow, there were no updates though after Eric's last comment.. >>> Eric, have there been any improvements in the past 6 months? >>> >>> Or should one still steer clear from EXT4 > 16TB? >> >> There is still no released e2fsprogs which supports > 16T for >> ext4, but testing of the not-released bits is welcomed... >> Ted says a 16T-capable version is coming soon. There's still >> work to be done there, though. >> >> -Eric >> > > Thanks Eric for confirming. > > With 7 x 3TB HDD its now possible to breach 16TB (16.38TB) in RAID-5 so I > suppose more people may start asking about this. Agreed, 16T is not that much these days. As Ric said, XFS will handle it without problem, though. -Eric > Justin. >