jloo at acm.org
Wed Oct 17 13:14:41 GMT 2001
I thought the limitation is with regard to the file (4 Gbyte) not the
file system, which I understand can be larger. I rember reading this
some place and this is applicable only to ext2 not the other file systems.
Andrew V. Samoilov wrote:
>Joseph Loo wrote:
>>I am not sure but you might be running into the limitations of the
>>ext2 file ssytem. I believe it has a 4 Gbyte limitation on a single
>>file. You might have to consider another file system for your large
>ext2 fs limitation is 2GB blocks. Block is at least 1024 bytes long.
>>Ivan Fernandez wrote:
>>>I'm reposting this problem (perhaps a bug) now I've got more
>>>information on it. This is another point of view of the situation
>>>and I hope someone could have run into the same trouble before (and
>>>solved it :-))
>>>This is it:
>>> * with ntbackup 2000 I create a 22Gb .bkf file in the
>>> * I can copy that file over a samba share and get correct
>>>info form the file in windows explorer.
>>> * ls -l also returns correct info, *WHILE* stat, mc, and
>>>other programs raise up with an error regarding a value too high for
>>>defined data type.
>Some program was compiled with large file support, some without.
>MC 4.5.55 can be configured with --enable-largefile. This also
>fixes some mc problems over ntfs on 2.4 kernels.
>>> * If I try to create the file with ntbackup directly over
>>>the share, it gets downsized to 0 bytes and grows slowly while
>>>ntbackup dies when the file crosses the 4 Gb (exactly) size.
>>> *I have compiled myself version 2.2.2 of samba and,
>>>surprisingly, the 4Gb "limit" situation described above was taken
>>>down to 2 Gb exactly.
>>>Any idea on what's happening, please??
>Please mail me kernel and glibc versions.
>>jloo at acm.org
jloo at acm.org
-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed
More information about the samba