ftp://linux.fnal.gov/linux/lts4x/i386/SL.documentation/RELEASE-NOTES-U1-x86-en
says about SL4.1:

"
   The ext2 and ext3 filesystems have an internal limit of 8 TB.  Devices
   up to this limit have been tested.
"

   Whoever tested a device up to the limit of 8 TB might have been able to
make a partition that big.  But one may also put a file system on an
unpartitioned disk.
   There's a limit on the size of md software raid for individual members:

"
   The maximum size disk that can be a member of an md software RAID
   set is 2 TB. The md RAID device itself can be larger than 2 TB.
   Devices have been tested up to 8 TB.
"




Steven Yellin

On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Troy Dawson wrote:

> Ken Teh wrote:
> > I've just installed SL4.1 on a dual opteron 6.4TB disk array system. This is
> > my first disk array, so I'm full of questions.  The disk array is configured
> > as one large disk partition.  At 5.6TB, it's larger (according to what I've
> > read) than what ext3 can handle.  So, I'm thinking of putting either JFS or
> > XFS on the system.
> >
> > SL4.1's stock kernel does not have built-in JFS nor XFS support.  But there
> > is a contributed XFS rpm.  Is this the preferred filesystem for large
> > partitions?  If so, why?
> >
> > I don't know the history of XFS, but I first encountered JFS in the late 80s
> > when I worked on an AIX machine.  Also, I read on the web that JFS has
> > better performance than XFS.
> >
> > Comments??
> >
> > Ken
>
>  From the Scientific Linux 4.2 release notes
>
>       o The current ext3 file system limit in Scientific Linux 4.2
>         is 8 terabytes. The e2fsprogs package has been updated to
>         adhere to this file system limit.
>
> So it looks like if you use S.L. 4.2 you should be ok with 4.2.
> (OK, so we haven't *officially* released it ... there is one file
> driving us nuts, but what's in 4.2 is really what's going to be released.)
>
> But the question about the other stuff I think would be good to be
> answered.  But I'm not really the expert.
>
> This is what I've been told.
>
> XFS - good for very large files
> Reiser - good for lots of small files
>
> Well ... that's not very much information, but all I have at the moment.
>
> Troy
> --
> __________________________________________________
> Troy Dawson  [log in to unmask]  (630)840-6468
> Fermilab  ComputingDivision/CSS  CSI Group
> __________________________________________________
>