Xref: utzoo news.sysadmin:3695 news.software.b:7684 comp.unix.aix:4943 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!uunet!rufus!drake.almaden.ibm.com!drake From: drake@drake.almaden.ibm.com Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,news.software.b,comp.unix.aix Subject: Re: IBM RS/6000 unsuitable for news Message-ID: <731@rufus.UUCP> Date: 7 May 91 19:46:11 GMT References: <1991May07.160042.28634@turnkey.tcc.com> Sender: news@rufus.UUCP Organization: IBM Almaden Research Center Lines: 22 In article <1991May07.160042.28634@turnkey.tcc.com> jackv@turnkey.TCC.COM (Jack F. Vogel) writes: >In article bglenden@colobus.cv.nrao.edu (Brian Glendenning) writes: >>(Also, the number of inodes >>is fixed, which would be painful if we could drop the block size...). > >I have seen this said a couple of different times, is this literally >true? You mean you can't choose the number of inodes when the filesystem >is created?? This seems bizarre if true, but then I know nothing about >JFS. This isn't an issue. When a filesystem is created (or later expanded), the number of inodes is set to the number of 4K blocks in the filesystem. In other words, except in cases where there are zero length files in the filesystem, it's impossible to run out of inodes. It's true that the number is "fixed", but only in that you can't change it. But the default is always "big enough". Sam Drake / IBM Almaden Research Center Internet: drake@ibm.com BITNET: DRAKE at ALMADEN Usenet: ...!uunet!ibmarc!drake Phone: (408) 927-1861