Hello Nick, Wednesday, February 11, 2015, 1:05:20 PM, you wrote:
NH> On 02/11/15 11:58, Jan Stary wrote: >> On Feb 10 17:48:22, na...@mips.inka.de wrote: >>> On 2015-02-10, yary <not....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I know FFS2 can handle that size easily, but I'm worried about fsck >>>> taking forever. This machine will have 1.5GB RAM, from what I've read >>>> that's not enough memory to fsck a 4TB volume without painful >>>> swapping. >>> >>> It vastly depends on the number of files you have on there. >>> Here's an almost full 4TB drive... >> >> FAQ4 still says >> >> If you make very large partitions, keep in mind that performing >> filesystem checks using fsck(8) requires about 1M of RAM per gigabyte of >> filesystem size >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >> Does that still apply? >> >> Jan >> NH> It is probably far less than that currently, but lacking a more precise NH> number, I don't think this is a bad rule of thumb, and if you wish to NH> disregard it, I suspect you either read and really understand the code NH> or do some real world testing on YOUR hardware and file systems. The NH> penalties for too much RAM are minimal; the penalties for too little are NH> ... substantial. NH> Note that you don't have to leave file systems mounted RW all the time, NH> especially a backup server. Mount it RW when you need it, dismount or NH> RO it when you don't...tripping over the power power cords won't NH> (shouldn't?) corrupt a file system that is mounted RO. You don't get to NH> ignore the issues, but you can reduce their occurrence. I was entertaining the idea of making a 100 TB OpenBSD based archive storage, even asked the list. The only answer pointed to that FAQ page, and it stopped me from pursuing that idea. Servers with 128 GB of RAM aren't uncommon, but expensive (comparing to 64/32 GB ones). -- Best regards, Boris mailto:bo...@twopoint.com
