From: James Pearson Subject: Re: df and "Value too large for defined data type" Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:16:19 +0000 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <403DC773.409BE2BB@moving-picture.com> References: <403B512C.66BF37BB@moving-picture.com> <403D2217.9040405@moving-picture.com> <20040225224016.GC24990@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.12] helo=sc8-sf-mx2.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1AwIaw-000770-Ry for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:18:18 -0800 Received: from mpc-26.sohonet.co.uk ([193.203.82.251] helo=moving-picture.com) by sc8-sf-mx2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1AwILU-0006Hr-68 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:02:20 -0800 To: Greg Banks Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: I'll probally send an email to the XFS list about this - the problem is that we've done nothing different with the file system set up on this server compared with the many others we have - i.e. the file systems were set up with: mkfs -t xfs /dev/sdb1 etc. It's just that the file systems in question seem to be saying that the number of inodes on the file system is 2^64 - whereas all the other XFS file systems we have (of a similar size) have nowhere near 2^32 inodes ... However, the one big difference is that the RAID array in question is 3.5TB - which is partioned on the RAID into 4 (i.e. Linux sees 4 devices on different LUNs) - therefore the overall size of the RAID array is a lot bigger than anything else we've used before (we don't have anything else over 2TB) - and the version of xfsprogs used was very old (1.3.17-0) ... I'm going to remake one of the partitions with a newer version of mkfs.xfs to see if that makes a difference ... James Pearson Greg Banks wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 10:30:47PM +0000, James Pearson wrote: > > The underlying remote file system is XFS - which in this case appears to > > be saying that it has 2^64 - 1 inodes - which doesn't seem correct... > > XFS supports 64 bit inodes, so this can be correct if it's either > > 1. on Linux, and very recent, and mounted with the right options, or > > 2. on IRIX > > Greg. > -- > Greg Banks, R&D Software Engineer, SGI Australian Software Group. > I don't speak for SGI. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs