On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Denis Doroshenko <[email protected]> wrote: >> even if it worked, you won't be able to run fsck after the fact. > > could you please be more informative? won't it work because of FFS2 or > because of 1.5TB? it seems that the man page for growfs(8) doesn't say > a word about FFS2, although it contains a few don't. also, growfs(8) > could abort on the filesystem that is obviously not suitable to be > grown.
I don't think fsck will be able to allocate enough memory to run, this has been mentioned a few times. As a general matter, I'm a bit of a downer on ffs2 because I think it's the wrong solution. FFS was (and is) great for its problem domain, but outside the comfort zone it's not so hot. So I'd advise not making such large filesystems, regardless of whether it can be made to work or not in a particular situation. As for growfs, it generally requires a degree of foresight one doesn't have, or tricksy games afterward. The tools are provided because they may be of use, but that's not to imply OpenBSD is the ideal multi-terabyte file server. That's my opinion anyway.
