From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 26 16:07:28 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D222116A41C for ; Sun, 26 Jun 2005 16:07:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd@meijome.net) Received: from sigma.octantis.com.au (sigma.octantis.com.au [207.44.188.23]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96EE043D1D for ; Sun, 26 Jun 2005 16:07:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd@meijome.net) Received: (qmail 15740 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2005 02:07:28 +1000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.13.3?) (202.59.110.3) by sigma.octantis.com.au with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 27 Jun 2005 02:07:27 +1000 Message-ID: <42BED2AF.8070701@meijome.net> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 02:07:11 +1000 From: Norberto Meijome User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Garrett Cooper References: <42BE3798.1020200@meijome.net> <20050626052603.GB9894@dan.emsphone.com> <42BE442C.9090502@meijome.net> <42BE4F33.6040101@meijome.net> <20050626070220.GA51206@dan.emsphone.com> <42BE9359.8000401@meijome.net> <42BE9BB5.9030400@u.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <42BE9BB5.9030400@u.washington.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 4 GB file limit? (WAS gzip from ports vs gzip from system) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 16:07:28 -0000 Garrett Cooper wrote: > > I am not entirely sure what the issue may be, but NTFS does > definitely support file sizes beyond 2 Gb; I think that the only FS'es > that don't do that still are Fat based or ext2, but I could be wrong. u're right. > Also, I'm not entirely sure which version of NFS that the SFU NFS > runs (other than it's some sort of PCNFS), and I have certainly not > tried transferring over 2 Gb of data to Windows NFS shares in the past, no, tested 2 and 3 GB...4 seemed to be the new barrier. the version I run (see other posting) supports nfs v3. > but here's what I might suggest doing to remedy this issue: > 1. Split up data before the 2 Gb point (dd, truncate, or what have > you is your friend in this case). > 2. Send data to Windows NFS share. > 3. Download and setup Cygwin. > 4. 'Recompile' everything back into its original file, if you wish, > using tools in Cygwin such as cat. yeah, that is my last resort. Right now, I disabled amd, mounted via mount_nfs forcing nfs3 (which should be default for mount_nfs, but not amd)...and it's been running nicely...it has just crossed the 4 GB point where it was diying before, so that's definitely progress. Now to figure out amd.conf and force nfs3 for this server. And to figure out why only under 10Mbps transfers via nfs (on a 100Mbps link...when I can get scp transfers at 40 Mbps....)... thanks for ur suggestions and time,Garrett. Beto