Large file support for Linux?

[Alex Kiernan]

toon at vdpas.hobby.nl writes:

> Jeesh!
> I'm making plans for upgrading our news server, and decided
> to go for LFS. Our history database is getting pretty large.
> 
> Is there a solution for this problem?

Someone could try and implement the change I proposed in
<72u1u2laht.fsf at nd1.eng.demon.net>; I do think it would help (sorry
not me at the moment, too many other things going on).

> Mike, was this with STABLE or CURRENT?
> With regard to LFS, does it make a difference wether one uses
> STABLE or CURRENT?
> 

Nope (not as far as the history format goes anyway)

> Thanks for any advice on this.
> It looks like the current inn is not suitable for large
> news server if regular hardware is being used.
> 
> Regards,
> Toon.
> 
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 10:31:55AM +0000, Miquel van Smoorenburg  wrote:
> > In article <20020115235839.29683.qmail at web9905.mail.yahoo.com>,
> > Day Dreamer  <jmansukh at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > >This may be a silly question.  I was wondering if
> > >there is a way to enable large file support (>2GB) on
> > >RedHat Linux 7.x for INN 2.3?
> > 
> > You need to run a recent 2.4 kernel and glibc 2.2.x. Then configure
> > INN with large file support, recompile, install.
> > 
> > I haven't had much luck with this though. The history dbz files are
> > much bigger due to the 64 bit file offset they need to store, and
> > INN likes to keep them in memory. Add to that that the 2.4 kernels
> > *still* have lots of problems with VM.
> > 
> > In my case I had a feeder with ~70GB of CNFS file store and 7 days
> > of history on a 1 GB box and 1 GB wasn't enough - the machine went
> > into 500 GB of swap and got dead-slow. Expire took more than a day.
> > 
> > I went back to a non-LFS INN, that helped.
> > 
> > Mike.

-- 
Alex Kiernan, Principal Engineer, Development, Thus PLC