Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 06:31:48PM -0700, Isaac wrote:
>> Well, ext3 will supposedly work with up to 16 TB in RHEL5, so SL should
>> have similar limits.
>>
> 
> 
> I can confirm that at least a 7 TB ext3 filesystem is possible. I have
> one 8x1TB RAID5 array running ext3 built with stock SL ext3 tools.
> 
> I cannot confirm the 16 TB limit. Can you point us to a reference somewhere?
> 
> Here is my information:
> 
> I looked into this several years ago when building an 11 TB filesystem. The SL mke2fs
> refused to make an ext3 filesystem that big and it turned out that mke2fs sources
> had a hardwired limit of 8 TB maximum filesystem size. Instead, I made an 11 TB XFS
> filesystem and it is still running just fine thank you very much.
> 
> 

Here is the web page with the limits.

http://www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/

Don't worry about the subscriptions, and assume that S.L. is equivilant 
to AS or Advanced Platform.

One thing to note is that this page get's updates after each update, so 
these number apply to SL 5.5.  You might run into some lower limits if 
you are running SL 5.0.
But if you are working with 1 to 2 Terabytes, you should be fine.

My opinion.
I use ext3 for everything, and I have several filesystems that are in 
the 2 Terabyte range.
If doesn't depend on how big your file system is, it depends on what you 
are doing with it.
Only use XFS on x86_64.
If you are writing, reading, and deleting lots of small files (1000 - 
10,000) all the time, XFS is the winner because it deletes much much faster.
Other than those two comments about XFS, I'm not going to say anymore. 
As I said at the beginning, I use ext3 on everything with no complaints. 
  I plan on using ext4 when I move to SL 6.

Troy
-- 
__________________________________________________
Troy Dawson  [log in to unmask]  (630)840-6468
Fermilab  ComputingDivision/LSCS/CSI/USS Group
__________________________________________________