Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 14:11:08 -0400 From: Gary Corcoran <garycor@comcast.net> To: Sam <sah@softcardsystems.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Message-ID: <4149D73C.5030309@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0409161040480.28550@athena> References: <41483C97.2030303@fer.hr> <Pine.LNX.4.60.0409151047230.21034@athena> <Pine.GSO.4.61.0409161010020.29724@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk> <Pine.GSO.4.61.0409161528520.29724@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk> <Pine.LNX.4.60.0409161040480.28550@athena>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sam wrote: > On Thu, 16 Sep 2004, Jan Grant wrote: > >> On Thu, 16 Sep 2004, Sam wrote: >> >>> Let's suppose you generate an exabyte of storage per year. Filling a >>> 64-bit >>> filesystem would take you approximately 8 million years. >> >> >> Hang on, I'm not sure I know where these numbers are coming from. >> >> 1PB is - what? 2^50 bytes? That looks closer to 2^64 than your >> figures indicate. I'd imagine an exabyte a year ought to be topping out >> after 16 years. I'm missing about half-a-dozen orders of magnitude >> somewhere it seems. > > > 1PB is indeed 2^50 bytes, but filesystems don't address on the byte, > but on the block (1K, 4K, 8k, ...). The numbers I'm using assume > the filesystem addresses on the sector, which is unrealistically > small. Jack it up to a 16K blocksize and you jump a few hundred > ZB in size. You have to be able to *seek* on a byte boundary. Hence doesn't a "64-bit" filesystem indeed mean "only" 2^64 bytes? Gary
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4149D73C.5030309>