31 31
gprovost

Helios4 Support

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, martinayotte said:

It is not "fsk" but "fsck" ...

🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

 

Thanks a lot it help to type the right command everything ia back om track.... Just need to remember my password now. 

 

👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, dazhan98 said:

I own a helios4 batch 3 and just curious, does anyone know how long it usually takes for an armbian release of a debian update? they just released 10.1, I was thinking of waiting for a Helios4 image before setting everything.

 

You don't have to wait, using apt-get upgrade will update your system to the same packages version (or even more recent) than the latest Debian Release image.

See Debian Release update as just a new image built with the latest packages available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, gprovost said:

 

You don't have to wait, using apt-get upgrade will update your system to the same packages version (or even more recent) than the latest Debian Release image.

See Debian Release update as just a new image built with the latest packages available.

 

Oh legend! Thanks, I'll start setting it up tomorrow night then. Been looking forward to it for a while now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2019 at 5:22 AM, gprovost said:

Regarding the advertised max raw capacity of 48TB, this doesn't take into account Port Multiplier usage. It was just the max raw capacity using 4x of the biggest NAS HDD available at that time on the market.

 

 

 

Does this mean I can use 4 x 16TB? The wiki is a bit confusing, it says: "Max Raw Capacity 48 TB (12 TB drive x 4)" and "Max Single Volume Size 16 TB". What about 2x12 and 2x14 for example?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, uiop said:

What about 2x12 and 2x14 for example?


16TB is partition/volume limit. Whatever goes below that is fine.

 

You can mount drives separate, but can't join them into one volume that is larger than 16TB. It's 32bit OS/hardware limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@uiop The 32-bit architecture limitation is actually on Linux page cache which is used by file systems, therefore limiting the max usable size of a partition or logical volume to 16TB. This doesn't stop you to have several partition (or logical volume) of <16TB.

 

Here an example taking in consideration 4x 12TB HDD :

 

If you use mdadm and you setup a RAID6 or RAID10 array, you will have an array of 24TB of usable space .

You can then create 2x partition of 12TB or any other combination that would max out the array size, till a each partition doesn't exceed 16TB.

 

If you use lvm and you setup a Volume Group (VG) with the 4 drives (PV), you will get a volume group of 48TB of usable space.

You can then create as many (max: 255) Logical Volume (LV) to max out the VG size till each LV doesn't exceed 16TB.

 

Actually a good approach is to use LVM on top of MDADM Raid, this way it gives flexibility to resize your partition, or i should say Logical Volume (LV).

 

After you can of course neither use mdadm or lvm, and just setup individually each disk... till you follow the rules that you can't create a single partition bigger than 16TB, but you can create several partition.

 

Hope it clarifies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, gprovost said:

If you use mdadm and you setup a RAID6 or RAID10 array, you will have an array of 24TB of usable space .
You can then create 2x partition of 12TB or any other combination that would max out the array size, till a each partition doesn't exceed 16TB.

@gprovost Do the tools to create filesystems like mkfs.ext4, mkfs.btrfs and so on, prevent the user to create partitions bigger than 16TB knowing that this is a 32-bit architecture? Or is it up to the user to know this limitation?

 

Also couldn't btrfs be used to beat the 16TB limit on 32-bit architecture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Doni said:

Do the tools to create filesystems like mkfs.ext4, mkfs.btrfs and so on, prevent the user to create partitions bigger than 16TB knowing that this is a 32-bit architecture? Or is it up to the user to know this limitation?

 

That's a good question and I don't have a details list of partitioning & fs tool behavior. Some tool will prevent, but other will let user create partition bigger than 16TB and the issue will only show up later (e.g during the fs inode table initialization or anything trying to access a block that goes beyond the 16TB region). I must admit that it would be a very useful investigation to test all the use case with the different tool available.

 

As for btrfs, apparently on 32-bit architecture it is recommended to not create volume bigger than 8TB because some brtfs tools might not work properly on 32-bit arch with bigger partition. I'm just reporting what I read online, I haven't tested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, gprovost said:

As for btrfs, apparently on 32-bit architecture it is recommended to not create volume bigger than 8TB because some brtfs tools might not work properly on 32-bit arch with bigger partition. I'm just reporting what I read online, I haven't tested.

Oh <edit: expletive actually deleted>.  umm, do you have a source for that?

Edited by devman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/12/2019 at 8:24 AM, gprovost said:

As for btrfs, apparently on 32-bit architecture it is recommended to not create volume bigger than 8TB because some brtfs tools might not work properly on 32-bit arch with bigger partition. I'm just reporting what I read online, I haven't tested.

That's a pity, but good to know. So if I want my 16TB Volume to have checksums of file contents (against bit-rot), there's only ZFS left, with its own problems (not in kernel, eats a lot of Ram).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
31 31