> I have a 40 million record database (about 40GB and growing) and I
> notice that some of my multicolumn indices are beginning to approach
> 2GB on disk.
>
> Will there be any problems spanning the 32 bit limit here (a la tables
> in version 6.4)?
Please refer to the attached messages from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CN
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from nic.funet.fi (nic.funet.fi [128.214.248.6])
by mail.sinyih.com.tw (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA19559
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 17:57:56 +0800
Received: from vger.rutgers.edu ([128.6.190.2]:49714 "EHLO vger.rutgers.edu" ident:
"NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]") by nic.funet.fi with ESMTP id <10060-29820>; Sun, 14 Mar 1999
03:56:04 +0200
Received: by vger.rutgers.edu via listexpand id <160871-212>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999
20:56:57 -0500
Received: by vger.rutgers.edu id <160865-215>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 20:56:53 -0500
Received: from pop.uniserve.com ([204.244.156.3]:3119 "HELO pop.uniserve.com" ident:
"NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]") by vger.rutgers.edu with SMTP id <160864-215>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999
20:56:06 -0500
Received: from shell.uniserve.ca [204.244.186.218]
by pop.uniserve.com with smtp (Exim 1.82 #4)
id 10M066-0001xz-00; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 17:53:46 -0800
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 17:53:43 -0800 (PST)
From: Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Matti Aarnio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: Dietmar Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Maximum filesize of one file
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-raid-outgoing
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, Matti Aarnio wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dietmar Stein) asked:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > not really the topic - I know - but I read that the maximum size of one
> > file is currently 2GB on linux like on other operating systems (e.g
> > HP-UX supports filesizes above 2GB but HP does not take support for it).
> >
> > Is there a way to increase the size for testing? I was looking for a
> > parameter in the kernel like ulimit but didn't find until now. Can
> > someone tell me how to change/increase?
>
> With Linux 2.0 kernel series at 32-bit systems (e.g. i386)
> the answer is: 2G is absolute limit, period.
>
> The longer answer contains the size limit explanations
> which are available at 64-bit systems (for 2.0 just Alpha
> machines). See files at ftp://mea.tmt.tele.fi/linux/LFS/
>
> At the above mentioned place there is also patch for the kernel
> to support sizes over 2G at 32-bit platforms, however they
> are not fully ready to be used quite yet -- some issues are
> still open regarding glibc 2.1 support syncing.
I don't know about this. I believe the primary issue is support for >
2GB files is a design limiation in ext2fs. I don't think it has anything
to do with the architecture. Supposedly, ext3fs will fix this.
For example, FreeBSD has support > 2GB because it uses UFS, and UFS
supports > 2GB files. I understand that UFS is available for Linux too,
and when you use it, you get > 2GB files too. I also understand that
other non-ext2fs filesystems for Linux > 2GB files too.
Tom
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from nic.funet.fi (nic.funet.fi [128.214.248.6])
by mail.sinyih.com.tw (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA19574
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 18:36:17 +0800
Received: from vger.rutgers.edu ([128.6.190.2]:18512 "EHLO vger.rutgers.edu" ident:
"NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]") by nic.funet.fi with ESMTP id <10167-6944>; Sun, 14 Mar 1999
04:33:47 +0200
Received: by vger.rutgers.edu via listexpand id <160367-215>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999
21:34:55 -0500
Received: by vger.rutgers.edu id <157678-212>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 21:34:48 -0500
Received: from mea.tmt.tele.fi ([194.252.70.162]:1124 "EHLO mea.tmt.tele.fi" ident:
"IDENT-NONSENSE") by vger.rutgers.edu with ESMTP id <160249-212>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999
21:34:30 -0500
Received: by mea.tmt.tele.fi id <92257-406>; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 04:30:58 +0200
Subject: Re: Maximum filesize of one file
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> from Tom at
"Mar 13, 99 05:53:43 pm"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 04:30:58 +0200 (EET)
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Matti Aarnio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Phone: +358-20402082 (office, with redirection to cellular)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-raid-outgoing
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pronouncedth:
> On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, Matti Aarnio wrote:
> > With Linux 2.0 kernel series at 32-bit systems (e.g. i386)
> > the answer is: 2G is absolute limit, period.
> >
> > The longer answer contains the size limit explanations
> > which are available at 64-bit systems (for 2.0 just Alpha
> > machines). See files at ftp://mea.tmt.tele.fi/linux/LFS/
> >
> > At the above mentioned place there is also patch for the kernel
> > to support sizes over 2G at 32-bit platforms, however they
> > are not fully ready to be used quite yet -- some issues are
> > still open regarding glibc 2.1 support syncing.
>
> I don't know about this. I believe the primary issue is support for >
> 2GB files is a design limiation in ext2fs. I don't think it has anything
> to do with the architecture. Supposedly, ext3fs will fix this.
I am happily using ext2 filesystem at my Alpha, and do use
filesizes exceeding 2G quite regularly, thank you. I have
done so since 1.3 series kernels well before 2.* came out.
(Not earlier simply because I didn't have an Alpha before that..)
> For example, FreeBSD has support > 2GB because it uses UFS, and UFS
> supports > 2GB files. I understand that UFS is available for Linux too,
> and when you use it, you get > 2GB files too. I also understand that
> other non-ext2fs filesystems for Linux > 2GB files too.
No you don't. The VFS layer limitations prevent that at 32-bit
machines (without my patches, that is.)
In fact because the UFS and EXT2 share same principal block
addressing scheme at the device, they both have SAME maximum
file size limits with given filesystem block size. (As do all
SysV filesystems, Minix FS, etc. all which use the triply-in-
directed block addressing scheme coming to us from the original
AT&T creation so long ago...)
> Tom
/Matti Aarnio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
