From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jul  8 21:32:05 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66FAC106564A
	for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Tue,  8 Jul 2008 21:32:05 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com)
Received: from mail.bitblocks.com (mail.bitblocks.com [64.142.15.60])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E8BE8FC13
	for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Tue,  8 Jul 2008 21:32:05 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com)
Received: from bitblocks.com (localhost.bitblocks.com [127.0.0.1])
	by mail.bitblocks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39FC75B46;
	Tue,  8 Jul 2008 14:13:44 -0700 (PDT)
To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:01:50 PDT."
	<4873C7AE.50809@elischer.org> 
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 14:13:44 -0700
From: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com>
Message-Id: <20080708211344.39FC75B46@mail.bitblocks.com>
Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, juri_mian@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 24 TB UFS2 reality check ? 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 21:32:05 -0000

On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:01:50 PDT Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>  wrote:
> Juri Mianovich wrote:
> > I am about to attach 24 1 TB drives to a 3ware 9650SE-24 raid card
> and attach it to a FreeBSD 6.3-RELEASE system.
>
> > I am going to newfs that raw disk and turn it into one giant 24 TB
> UFS2 filesystem:

I think Jan is asking for trouble....  At the very least he
should consider mirroring or RAID5ing.

> You had better have a lot of memory available ot your processes to be 
> able to fsck this baby.. (it'd better be an amd64)..
> I don't remember the exact numbers but for 16k blocksize,
> it was something like 200MB ram for each 100GB of filesystem when 
> populated with 60KB files..
> (don't trust those numbers, do some testing (and let us know :-) )

I vaguely recall it was more like 700MB of memory per
Terabyte on a 50% filled UFS2.  Things may have improved
in the three years since I did that.  I don't recall the time
to fsck but it was pretty bad!  That was the main reason I
switched from UFS2.