Disk size on my NT

[Matthew Geier]

> From: Peter Blake <ppb at baloo.tcp.co.uk>
> To: Johan Meiring <jjm at iname.com>
> Subject: Re: Disk size on my NT
> Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.95.980218064049.15559A-100000 at ka.blake.org.uk>
> 
> On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Johan Meiring wrote:
> 
> > >On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 tmh/Copenhagen at manbw.dk wrote:
> > >
> > >>      HI Samba Admin's
> > >>     
> > >>     I have a share called "archive". The disksize on the HP is 7GB, my
> > NT 
> > >>     3.51 and NT 4.0 says it's 4GB.
> > >>      
> > >>      Can anyone help me?
> > >> 
> > >
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >W95 would report it as 2GBytes. It's a fundamental limitation of a 32-bit
> > >integer: unsigned = 4 GBytes, signed = 2 GBytes.
> > >
> > >You will have to partition the drive to make all of it useable by the M$
> > >products. I think it might be distinctly dodgy to use it as it is.

> 
> The corruption takes the form of source files being overwritten by output
> files. The problem can be reproduced by simple PRN generator tests, so it
> is not due to the video editing suite.
> 
> Limiting the partition size to 2 GBytes greatly reduces the incidence of
> file corruption - a practice recommended in M$ KnowledgeBase articles.

 Could this explain a long standing problem ive had with word documents
randoming becoming corrupt and crashing word ?.
 For quite a long time I was running a 4gib home 'disk' for my users, all
win95 workstations. With roving profiles on, some users just couldnt use
Office97 at all. Word6 seemed ok. Ive now turned roving profiles off and
the problem isnt so acute, but occasionally, some documents still crash
word.
 Im now have a 23Gb 'home' partition.

 If windows simply doesnt like large server volumes, it could go a long
way to explain why ive had this problem over multiple samba versions.
Partitioning it up into lots of 2Gb partitions is more pain than I can
contemplate.

 Would telling samba to 'lie' about the server volume size fix this ?