Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id f9PGXKL18178 for linux-xfs-outgoing; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:33:20 -0700 Received: from chef.cc.absoval.com (cpe-66-1-218-101.fl.sprintbbd.net [66.1.218.101]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id f9PGXGD18151 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:33:16 -0700 Received: from ieee.org (IDENT:bs@thebs.cc.absoval.com [192.168.100.89]) by chef.cc.absoval.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA27976; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:32:16 -0400 Message-ID: <3BD83E9B.E9EEFD4F@ieee.org> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:32:27 -0400 From: Bryan-TheBS-Smith Organization: SmithConcepts/AbsoluteValueSystems X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19-6.2.7 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Utz Lehmann CC: Steve Lord , "Martin K. Petersen" , Marc Schmitt , Eric Sandeen , linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com, florin@sgi.com Subject: Re: Corruption of in-memory data detected. References: <200110251505.f9PF5De15624@jen.americas.sgi.com> <20011025173909.A1336@de.tecosim.com> <200110251538.f9PFcHh16594@jen.americas.sgi.com> <20011025181706.B1336@de.tecosim.com> <20011025182057.C1336@de.tecosim.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Utz Lehmann wrote: > ok, i'm stupid. He has only 1.2TB and the default blocksize is > 1k. The test doesn't work until he can set his md device to > 512 byte blocksize from userspace. I don't know if this has any relevance, but don't the underlying 3Ware cards use a much bigger blocksize??? If this isn't an issue from a compatibility standpoint, how about a performance one? Or am I totally missing the mark here? Are there any other limitations with using such small blocksizes? Even at 512bytes, we should be able to get 2TB (4Gblocks x 512 bytes), right? -- TheBS -- Bryan "TheBS" Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org chat:thebs413 Engineer AbsoluteValue Systems, Inc. http://www.linux-wlan.org President SmithConcepts, Inc. http://www.SmithConcepts.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- Web site defacements are as much of a national security risk as inner city kids spray painting. There is nothing of value, and nothing that can't be fixed with a little re-paint. You'd have to have the equivalent stupidity of someone parking an F-18 in downtown LA. Even then, the only damage would be a new scheme! The US government wants life imprisonment for such "terrorism."