Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3

Laurent Vivier <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.file-systems,gmane.comp.file-systems.ext2.devel,gmane.linux.kernel
Organization Bull S.A.S.
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Qi Yong wrote:
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> When is the Linux syscall interface enough?  When should we just bump it
>>> and cut out all the compatibility interfaces?
>>>
>>> No, we don't; we let people configure certain obsolete bits out (a.out
>>> support etc), but we keep it in the tree despite the indirection cost to
>>> maintain multiple interfaces etc.
>>>    
>>>
>> Right. WE ADD NEW SYSTEM CALLS. WE DO NOT EXTEND THE OLD ONES IN WAYS THAT 
>> MIGHT BREAK OLD USERS.
>>
>> Your point was exactly what?
>>
>> Btw, where did that 2TB limit number come from? Afaik, it should be 16TB 
>> for a 4kB filesystem, no?
>>  
>>
> 
> Partition tables describe partitions in units of one sector.
> 2^(32+9) = 2T
> 
> To prevent integer overflow, we should use only 31 bits of a 32-bit integer.
> 2^(31+12) = 8T
> 
> There's _terrible_ hacks to really get to 16T.
> 
> -- qiyong
> 

IMHO, a simple solution is to use "Logical Volume Manager" instead of partition
manager: we create 64bit filesystem in a Logical Volume, not in a partition.

"partitioning is obsolete" ;-)

Regards,
Laurent

-- 
Laurent Vivier
Bull, Architect of an Open World (TM)
http://www.bullopensource.org/ext4
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 189 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEl7Eq9Kffa9pFVzwRAnegAJ9qmnAQT8FsgHL4QmwS9ocR1W2X7QCeOFr3
2yXHSlWvhIdvdXh0yhGvvA8=
=Pdyx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.