Hi all. I'm trying to create a ~9TB partition on a new file server.
I thought FreeBSD now supported this (I'm on 7.0), but I can't figure
it out. I go into sysinstall, create the partition in fdisk using A
= Use Entire Disk), write it to disk, exit sysinstall and re-run
it...and sysinstall
On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 08:39:48AM -0400, Brian McCann wrote:
Hi all. I'm trying to create a ~9TB partition on a new file server.
I thought FreeBSD now supported this (I'm on 7.0), but I can't figure
it out. I go into sysinstall, create the partition in fdisk using A
= Use Entire Disk),
Hi all. I'm trying to create a ~9TB partition on a new file server.
I thought FreeBSD now supported this (I'm on 7.0), but I can't figure
it out. I go into sysinstall, create the partition in fdisk using A
= Use Entire Disk), write it to disk, exit sysinstall and re-run
it...and sysinstall
That looks like what I need. I've got a seperate 32GB array to boot
off of, so that's perfect. Now to just read some man pages. Thanks!
--Brian
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Erik Trulsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 08:39:48AM -0400, Brian McCann wrote:
Hi all. I'm
Hmm...didn't think of that...didn't think fsck used that much
RAM...and thought it was independent of the file system size. Right
now it's got 2GB.
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 11:28 AM, Alexandre Biancalana
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/8/08, Brian McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That looks like
On 4/8/08, Brian McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That looks like what I need. I've got a seperate 32GB array to boot
off of, so that's perfect. Now to just read some man pages. Thanks!
How many memory do you have in this machine ?? To fsck 9 TB you will
need a LOT of memory
That looks like what I need. I've got a seperate 32GB array to boot
off of, so that's perfect. Now to just read some man pages. Thanks!
How many memory do you have in this machine ?? To fsck 9 TB you will
there is swap too . but my 1.4TB partition can be fsck'ed on 1GB RAM
without swap.
On 4/8/08, Brian McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmm...didn't think of that...didn't think fsck used that much
RAM...and thought it was independent of the file system size. Right
now it's got 2GB.
so better you think a little more before execute and do some tests
before production too...
On Tuesday 08 April 2008 11:20:58 am Wojciech Puchar wrote:
That looks like what I need. I've got a seperate 32GB array to boot
off of, so that's perfect. Now to just read some man pages. Thanks!
How many memory do you have in this machine ?? To fsck 9 TB you will
there is swap too .
it will be most likely large 32K blocks, so quick fsck and little RAM
In my experience with UFS2 and fsck you will want to have a gig of ram per TB
of filesystem. You can get by with less sometimes, eventually you'll get
bit. Most mere mortals don't take UFS2 past 6-8TB in production.
There
On 4/8/08, Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it will be most likely large 32K blocks, so quick fsck and little RAM
In my experience with UFS2 and fsck you will want to have a gig of ram per
TB
of filesystem. You can get by with less sometimes, eventually you'll get
bit.
you talk about VM, not real memory. i don't think making 10GB swap is a
problem.
The problem is the time that it will take to fsck a 9TB filesystem.
depends mostly of file count not size.
my 1.4TB partition is checked shorter than 20GB squid partition
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Wojciech Puchar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all. I'm trying to create a ~9TB partition on a new file server.
I thought FreeBSD now supported this (I'm on 7.0), but I can't figure
it out. I go into sysinstall, create the partition in fdisk using A
=
On Tuesday 08 April 2008 21:12:00 Edward Capriolo wrote:
Seems like a shame to boot a nice 9TB disk pack off a floppy Disk or a
Pen drive. I mean you do what you have to but that just screams
'workaround'
Or worrying about 1 minute longer boot cycle on 90 days+ uptime screams
optimization
On our older servers that wouldn't even recognize a 2TB partition
(which is where the OS was too), we used a CF card and CF card adapter
to boot from. Slightly more gracious...
CD/DVD drive isn't bad too. anyway - you don't change kernel every day.
or pendrive. possibly floppy but i don't
Seems like a shame to boot a nice 9TB disk pack off a floppy Disk or a
Pen drive. I mean you do what you have to but that just screams
'workaround'
Or worrying about 1 minute longer boot cycle on 90 days+ uptime screams
doesn't matter at all. it is workaround, but over strange BIOS software,
On our older servers that wouldn't even recognize a 2TB partition
(which is where the OS was too), we used a CF card and CF card adapter
to boot from. Slightly more gracious...
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Edward Capriolo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Wojciech
Hmm
I wonder what the advantages of this over softupdates are. Never really saw
the need for the google summer of code project etc for this when we have
softupdates
But I guess I must be missing something
--
martin
On 8/9/06, Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nikolas Britton
The advantage is never having to run fsck again... on large
filesystems this takes a long long long time. 16 hours would not be
unheard of.
On 8/10/06, Martin Hepworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmm
I wonder what the advantages of this over softupdates are. Never really saw
the need for the
On 08/08/06, Martin Hepworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Softupdates are the FreeBSD equivalent. From my point of view they perform
better than a traditional journaling FS (do a google search for the original
usenix papers on these).
Journalling means not having to fsck the file system in the
On 08/08/06, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right now, if no fsck is really really important to you for your data
store, then get an OpenSolaris system and put ZFS on it. Never fsck
again as it is ALWAYS (they claim) in a coherent state. Or wait for
ZFS to show up on
On 8/8/06, Martin Hepworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/8/06, Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
The single most important thing missing for me in FreeBSD is a journalling
file system as I would use it on every box.
snip
Softupdates are the FreeBSD equivalent. From my point of
Nikolas Britton wrote:
You've never had to fsck a 2TB+ array, have you?... This is why we
DEMAND journaling UFS2. or ZFS.
Ask and ye shall receive.
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2006-August/064932.html
Cheers,
Matthew
--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA,
On 08/08/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. I found my problem. (Sysinstall, aka fdisk, won't do more that
1.2TB.)
BTW, anybody have any good advice on how to manage a large file system?
Unfortunately I have to say consider Solaris or Linux as they have
journalling file
happy.
--
Martin
On 8/8/06, Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 08/08/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. I found my problem. (Sysinstall, aka fdisk, won't do more that
1.2TB.)
BTW, anybody have any good advice on how to manage a large file system?
Unfortunately I have
On 8/8/06, Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 08/08/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. I found my problem. (Sysinstall, aka fdisk, won't do more that
1.2TB.)
BTW, anybody have any good advice on how to manage a large file system?
...
The single most important thing
In the last episode (Aug 08), Atom Powers said:
On 8/8/06, Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 08/08/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. I found my problem. (Sysinstall, aka fdisk, won't do more
that 1.2TB.) BTW, anybody have any good advice on how to manage a
large file
On 8/8/06, Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
The single most important thing missing for me in FreeBSD is a journalling
file system as I would use it on every box.
snip
Softupdates are the FreeBSD equivalent. From my point of view they perform
better than a traditional journaling FS
On 08/08/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What exactly does a journaling file system give you? As I understand
it, it doesn't prevent corruption and it doesn't help you fix the
corruption when it occurs.
As answered by Dan Nelson. It saves time (sometimes a lot) in the event of
an
On Aug 8, 2006, at 1:01 PM, Freminlins wrote:
Yes, I had all that. It is of absolutely no use in the event of an
unclean
shutdown (on FreeBSD). If the file system itself is dirty, it will
need to
fsckd. The bigger the file system, the longer it takes (generall).
That is
what journalling
Somebody please tell me it is possible to create a file system larger
than 1.2TB.
--
--
Perfection is just a word I use occasionally with mustard.
--Atom Powers--
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Somebody please tell me it is possible to create a file system larger
than 1.2TB.
It is:
FilesystemSizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on
/dev/concat/c01.6T846G648G57%/backup
--
Christian Laursen
%/backup
Thanks. I found my problem. (Sysinstall, aka fdisk, won't do more that 1.2TB.)
BTW, anybody have any good advice on how to manage a large file system?
--
--
Perfection is just a word I use occasionally with mustard.
--Atom Powers--
___
freebsd
33 matches
Mail list logo
