limitations at 5,8 GB?

DISCUSSION Stefan Ewert 4 participants 4 messages Dec 25, 2003 – Jan 1, 2004

Subsystems (2)

NFS client NFS server

lore

Share & tools

lore

Stefan Ewert

author

2003-12-25 18:43 UTC #0 lore raw

Hi,

im new to nfs and i googeld about this problem but i didnt find a solution for the following problem:

I got a 100 GIG harddisk on my server and i mounted it on my client without any warnings or problems. the only thing is that i now have 5.8 GB instead of 100. Are there any restrictions in nfs protocol, or do u know a possible solution for this prob?

Thx!

Best Regards

Stefan Ewert

using Mdk9.2 AMD 1 Ghz

-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

Juri Haberland

2003-12-31 09:56 UTC #1 lore raw

Quoted 4 lines · Stefan Ewert

I got a 100 GIG harddisk on my server and i mounted it on my client without any warnings or problems. the only thing is that i now have 5.8 GB instead of 100. Are there any restrictions in nfs protocol, or do u know a possible solution for this prob?

I don't know where your problem is but there is no restriction of that size in the NFS protocol.

This what I get from 'df' on one of my clients:
...
nfs:/export/data 160066688 150683400 9383288 95% /net/data
...

You can see that I can access an exported disk with the size of 160GB.

Cheers,
Juri

Signature · 12 lines

Juri Haberland  <[email protected]> 



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.
Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills.  Sign up for IBM's
Free Linux Tutorials.  Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin.
Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

Olaf Kirch

2004-01-01 18:46 UTC #2 lore raw

Quoted 6 lines · Juri Haberland

This what I get from 'df' on one of my clients:
...
nfs:/export/data 160066688 150683400 9383288 95% /net/data
...
You can see that I can access an exported disk with the size of 160GB.

I remember there was an integer overflow in the NFS statfs implementation some 2.4 kernels that caused df to report silly disk sizes if the kernel picked the wrong block size.

Olaf

Signature · 13 lines

Olaf Kirch     |  Stop wasting entropy - start using predictable
[email protected]   |  tempfile names today!
---------------+ 


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.
Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills.  Sign up for IBM's
Free Linux Tutorials.  Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin.
Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

Paul Heinlein

2003-12-31 16:54 UTC #3 lore raw

In reply to Stefan Ewert

Quoted 7 lines · Stefan Ewert

im new to nfs and i googeld about this problem but i didnt find a solution for the following problem:
I got a 100 GIG harddisk on my server and i mounted it on my client without any warnings or problems. the only thing is that i now have 5.8 GB instead of 100. Are there any restrictions in nfs protocol, or do u know a possible solution for this prob?

There's certainly no problem with a 100GB export. I'm using a Linux server to export a 1.7-terabyte filesystem without difficulty.

I assume that you see the full 100 GB on your server, right? If so,

* Do you have any quota limitations on client or server?

* Is the 100GB disk divided into smallish partitions, or is it one huge partition? It could be that you've mounted just one of the partitions instead of all of them.

-- Paul Heinlein <[email protected]>