Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Jesper Krogh <jesper@krogh.cc> wrote:
>> Scott Marlowe wrote:
>> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:09 PM, justin <justin@emproshunts.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I chose to use ext3 on these partition
>> >
>> > You should really consider another file system. ext3 has two flaws
>> > that mean I can't really use it properly. A 2TB file system size
>> > limit (at least on the servers I've tested) and it locks the whole
>> > file system while deleting large files, which can take several seconds
>> > and stop ANYTHING from happening during that time. This means that
>> > dropping or truncating large tables in the middle of the day could
>> > halt your database for seconds at a time. This one misfeature means
>> > that ext2/3 are unsuitable for running under a database.
>>
>> I cannot acknowledge or deny the last one, but the first one is not
>> true. I have several volumes in the 4TB+ range on ext3 performing nicely.
>>
>> I can test the "large file stuff", but how large? .. several GB is not a
>> problem here.
>
> Is this on a 64 bit or 32 bit machine? We had the problem with a 32
> bit linux box (not sure what flavor) just a few months ago. I would
> not create a filesystem on a partition of 2+TB
It is on a 64 bit machine.. but ext3 doesnt have anything specifik in it
as far as I know.. I have mountet filesystems created on 32 bit on 64
bit and the other way around. The filesystems are around years old.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext3 => Limit seems to be 16TB currently
(It might get down to something lower if you choose a small blocksize).
--
Jesper
