On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 21:13:58 -0700
Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
On Feb 26, 2014, at 1:54 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
> Another aspect of xfs we may want to investigate and get feedback
> from filesystem folks is how well xfs works on 32bit these days.
>
> RHEL7 doesn't have a 32bit version in their beta, so they only need
> to support 64bit xfs. Does the fact that we expect to have 32bit
> workstation and/or server weigh into this decision any?
I think the only limit is 16TB max file system, so off hand I'd say
no. But this also applies to ext4.
I just tested with 3.13.4-200.fc20.i686+PAE.
XFS (sdc): file system too large to be mounted on this system.
EXT4-fs (sdc): filesystem too large to mount safely on this system.
The same 32-bit kernel mounts a 20TB Btrfs volume with no complaints,
so I don't know its limit.
http://paste.fedoraproject.org/80784/93470280/
XFS mounts with inode64 by default, same as x86_64. So that's good.
I wasn't referring to filesystem size limits... there was some issue
with Xfs and linux kernel stacks on 32bit linux causing crashes and
data loss.
I don't know if this has been fixed, no longer applies or just has been
ignored by only using it on 64bit machines, but before we go making it
a default and shipping it on 32bit, we should ask around about it. ;)
kevin