Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 17:46:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely5.cicely.de> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Darren Pilgrim <dmp@pantherdragon.org>, ticso@cicely.de, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: How does swap work address spacewise? Message-ID: <200207070046.g670kiQ3064200@apollo.backplane.com> References: <20020705234126.GA12183@atrbg11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> <3D2640A7.3EA2236B@pantherdragon.org> <20020706020656.GL48977@cicely5.cicely.de> <3D2762FE.9D9E0378@pantherdragon.org> <20020706220720.GG23704@cicely5.cicely.de> <3D277274.B5F3CE58@pantherdragon.org> <3D2776BE.A39A1110@mindspring.com> <20020706231346.GJ23704@cicely5.cicely.de> <200207062342.g66NgMri063859@apollo.backplane.com> <20020707001019.GK23704@cicely5.cicely.de> <20020707004304.GL23704@cicely5.cicely.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:> > :> > Physical block numbers are 512-byte sized, with a range of 2^32 :> > in -stable. This also winds up being 2TB. So increasing the fragment :> > size does not help in -stable. :> :> It's a proven fact that there is a 1T limit somewhere which was :> explained with physical block numbers beeing signed. : :-- :B.Walter COSMO-Project http://www.cosmo-project.de fsck and newfs would be unhappy with a 2TB sized filesystem (in stable), at least one with 512 byte sectors, due to internal math overflows but I think that's the only 1TB vs 2TB issue. -Matt Matthew Dillon <dillon@backplane.com> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200207070046.g670kiQ3064200>