From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 9 23:31:44 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F16B16A40E for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 23:31:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aronesimi@yahoo.com) Received: from web58602.mail.re3.yahoo.com (web58602.mail.re3.yahoo.com [68.142.236.200]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CC1F813C4B2 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 23:31:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aronesimi@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 21904 invoked by uid 60001); 9 Feb 2007 23:31:43 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=ezuAXGN1WPY21ktWyMG6ki7lSPDb5so0ZUUXvPBWvfhXH3G9wfunFfPOwTORTEWZ5Zy/qKg1KtZeou+H3cGfAXJC48Fd4ZPhvPFsNd2xI8MqAKsP1WRYRf2qQW8S8DlrDIsADLhzcWjMitDArmxr1sUTT85DMqKIL5B4yTr8Kh0=; X-YMail-OSG: 1EyvuUcVM1lVcavcI2Enw.aFbX8tig0PfFV3zNHp0MmnSM6uCoK4Cy8yFsFqT7FPY6VkaUV0v7cHHja7HvrC.rR9o2K0YUehr3a7nKa4JgSlxy8ckPl47g-- Received: from [71.136.246.192] by web58602.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:31:43 PST Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 15:31:43 -0800 (PST) From: Arone Silimantia To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <391245.1485.qm@web58602.mail.re3.yahoo.com> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:02:27 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: comments on newfs raw disk ? Safe ? (7 terabyte array) X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 23:31:44 -0000 On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Eric Anderson wrote: > I have 5 10Tb file systems (and some 2Tb ones, but who cares about those > tiny things? :)), and I can tell you that an empty huge file system is > pretty easily fsck-able, but a full one will kill you. It greatly > depends on how many files (inodes) you have used on the file system. If > you have a massive amount of small files, you'll be eating up a ton of > memory. My 'rule of thumb' for my data (which averages to about > 16k/file) is 1G of memory for each 1Tb of disk space used. So, on a > 10Tb file system, if I ever want the fsck to complete, I need an AMD64 > box with *at least* 10G of memory, plus a lot of time. A *lot* of time. > By 'a lot', I mean anywhere from a day, to several days. So ... the time it takes to fsck is not a function of how many inodes are actually initialized from newfs, but how many you are _actually using_ ? But the amount of memory the fsck takes is a function of how many inodes exist, regardless of how many you are actually using ? Are those two interpretations correct ? --------------------------------- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.