> I'm not sure how much 64-bit support the kernel expects so there might be some
> complications going that direction, but you can certainly install a 64-bit
> system and run the 32-bit versions of the apps and have both versions of most
> libraries available.
To bring some closure to this thread,
On 9/1/10 12:43 AM, Nataraj wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 8/31/2010 11:04 AM, Stephen Harris wrote:
>>
Stack size was only a problem for the 32 bit OS and not 64 bit. If
one
is dealing with a terabyte or more of data, I don't see them using a 32 bit
OS.
>>> Hu
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 8/31/2010 11:04 AM, Stephen Harris wrote:
>
>>> Stack size was only a problem for the 32 bit OS and not 64 bit. If
>>> one
>>> is dealing with a terabyte or more of data, I don't see them using a 32 bit
>>> OS.
>>>
>> Huh;
>>
>> /dev/mapper/Raid5-Media
>>
> According to the release notes this bug has been fixed in version 1.40:
>
> http://e2fsprogs.sourceforge.net/e2fsprogs-release.html#1.40
> E2fsprogs 1.40 (June 29, 2007)
> There was a floating point precision error which could cause e2fsck to
> loop forever on really big filesystems with a large
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:40:55 -0500
Sean Carolan wrote:
> According to the release notes this bug has been fixed in version 1.40:
>
> http://e2fsprogs.sourceforge.net/e2fsprogs-release.html#1.40
> E2fsprogs 1.40 (June 29, 2007)
> There was a floating point precision error which could cause e2fsck
According to the release notes this bug has been fixed in version 1.40:
http://e2fsprogs.sourceforge.net/e2fsprogs-release.html#1.40
E2fsprogs 1.40 (June 29, 2007)
There was a floating point precision error which could cause e2fsck to
loop forever on really big filesystems with a large inode count
On Aug 31, 2010, at 7:27 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Sean Carolan wrote:
>> I have a large (1.5TB) partition with millions of files on it. e2fsck has
>> been running nearly 12 hours and is still on "Checking directory
>> structure".
>> Any tips for speeding this along?
>
> Kill it. And make su
On 8/31/2010 11:04 AM, Stephen Harris wrote:
>> Stack size was only a problem for the 32 bit OS and not 64 bit. If one
>> is dealing with a terabyte or more of data, I don't see them using a 32 bit
>> OS.
>
> Huh;
>
> /dev/mapper/Raid5-Media
>3.3T 3.1T 216G 94% /Me
> To extend his comment: There is a bug in e2fsck for filesystems with
> many hardlinks. It could take *weeks* or longer, if it finishes at all,
> to run on a large filesystem with lots of hardlinks.
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov/msg02180.html
Awesome.
> Stack size was only a problem for the 32 bit OS and not 64 bit. If one
> is dealing with a terabyte or more of data, I don't see them using a 32 bit
> OS.
Huh;
/dev/mapper/Raid5-Media
3.3T 3.1T 216G 94% /Media
% uname -sr
Linux 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5PAE
> I really d
Brent L. Bates wrote:
> Stack size was only a problem for the 32 bit OS and not 64 bit. If
> one is dealing with a terabyte or more of data, I don't see them using a 32
> bit OS. I really don't see any really good reasons for using anything
but 64
> bit any more, if the hardware supports it.
Stack size was only a problem for the 32 bit OS and not 64 bit. If one
is dealing with a terabyte or more of data, I don't see them using a 32 bit
OS. I really don't see any really good reasons for using anything but 64 bit
any more, if the hardware supports it.
--
Brent L. Bates (UNIX
On 08/31/2010 06:19 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:14:23AM -0500, Sean Carolan wrote:
>
>> I have a large (1.5TB) partition with millions of files on it. e2fsck has
>> been running nearly 12 hours and is still on "Checking directory structure".
>> Any tips for speedin
Sean Carolan wrote:
> I have a large (1.5TB) partition with millions of files on it. e2fsck has
> been running nearly 12 hours and is still on "Checking directory
> structure".
> Any tips for speeding this along?
Kill it. And make sure it doesn't try to do it. There's a known bug with
fsck (at l
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:50:34AM -0500, Sean Carolan wrote:
> > Use the XFS file system and never have to worry about fsck again.
> > You'll
> > have a fast, more reliable, and more robust file system with over a decade
> > and
> > exabytes of use under its belt that you will never have to
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Brent L. Bates wrote:
> Use the XFS file system and never have to worry about fsck again. You'll
> have a fast, more reliable, and more robust file system with over a decade and
> exabytes of use under its belt that you will never have to wait for fsck
> again
> Yep, same answer here, I had RHEL4.8 on a 2.6 TB MSA, and you just leave it
> going over the weekend.
I kind of figured as much; we're letting ours run during the week so
that hopefully the partition will be ready for weekend backup jobs.
Thanks for the feedback.
___
On Aug 31, 2010, at 9:14 AM, Sean Carolan wrote:
> I have a large (1.5TB) partition with millions of files on it. e2fsck has
> been running nearly 12 hours and is still on "Checking directory structure".
> Any tips for speeding this along?
Disable fsck for that file system then google for on
Yep, same answer here, I had RHEL4.8 on a 2.6 TB MSA, and you just leave it
going over the weekend.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:14:23AM -0500, Sean Carolan wrote:
> > I have a large (1.5TB) partition with millions of files on it. e2fsck
>
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:14:23AM -0500, Sean Carolan wrote:
> I have a large (1.5TB) partition with millions of files on it. e2fsck has
> been running nearly 12 hours and is still on "Checking directory structure".
> Any tips for speeding this along?
Yes -- use ext4. Otherwise, it's inevitable
20 matches
Mail list logo
