Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #4102

Re: ext3 filesize problem

Show all headers | View raw

At 4 Feb 2012 07:14:32 GMT Greg Russell <me@invalid.org> wrote:

> 
> On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 06:57:04 +0100, Aragorn wrote in
> jgihbg$dov$1@dont-email.me :
> 
> > On Saturday 04 February 2012 06:23, Greg Russell conveyed the following
> > to comp.os.linux.misc...
> > 
> >> On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 05:47:06 +0100, Aragorn wrote in
> >> jgid8b$vrm$1@dont-email.me :
> >> 
> >>> On Saturday 04 February 2012 05:40, Greg Russell conveyed the
> >>> following to comp.os.linux.misc...
> >>> 
> >>>> On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 20:55:59 +0000, J G Miller wrote in
> >>>> jghhkv$on1$1@dont-email.me :
> >>>> 
> >>>>> On Friday, February 3rd, 2012, at 19:39:13h +0000, Greg Russell
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> but why motion should limit an mpeg file to 2GB is still not
> >>>>>> understandable to me
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Well in another post, Stan has suggested the reason is due to the 32
> >>>>> bit limit if you are using a 32 bit version of motion.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Yes, ... and I find that reasoning to be inadequate and unconvincing.
> >>>> 2 GB is not a limit on a 32-bit ext3 filesystem.
> >>> 
> >>> No, but it may be and often is the limit of /certain/ 32-bit
> >>> _applications_ [*].  It has nothing to do with the ext3 filesystem.
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> [*] The following pertains to web browsers and download utilities,
> >>>     but it's a useful bit of information...:
> >>>     http://www.kernel.org/faq/#largefiles
> >> 
> >> No, it's not useful at all in explaining why motion limits itself to a
> >> 2GB output filesize on a filesystem that isn't 2GB-limited; it has no
> >> relation to the topic under discussion.
> > 
> > It explains why certain applications are known to limit the size of a
> > downloaded file to 2 GB ...
> 
> No, it certainly doesn't.
> 
> > Apparently "motion" - or at least, the 32-bit version of it - cannot
> > handle files larger than 2 GB.  Buffer size, checkpoints, et al.  It is
> > not - repeat: not - a limitation of the filesystem, but instead it is a
> > limitation of the application.
> 
> <sigh> ... good, good, you're starting to address the issue, albeit quite 
> obliquely.
> 
> > There are editors which suffer from the same limitation. ...
> 
> <sigh> ... and what limitation is that wrt "motion"?

Has *anyone* looked at the actual code?  The specific limitation might
even be (shudder) *documented* in the code.  And there might even be an
explaination as to why the limitation is there.  The limitation might be
stupid or might be a design flaw, but it is obviously there.

> 
>                                                                        

-- 
Robert Heller             -- 978-544-6933 / heller@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software        -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments


                                                                                                   

Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

ext3 filesize problem Greg Russell <me@invalid.org> - 2012-01-21 23:53 +0000
  Re: ext3 filesize problem J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-01-22 00:43 +0000
    Re: ext3 filesize problem Stan Bischof <stan@worldbadminton.com> - 2012-01-23 16:24 +0000
      Re: ext3 filesize problem J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-01-23 18:03 +0000
    Re: ext3 filesize problem Greg Russell <me@invalid.org> - 2012-02-03 19:39 +0000
      Re: ext3 filesize problem J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-02-03 20:55 +0000
        Re: ext3 filesize problem Greg Russell <me@invalid.org> - 2012-02-04 04:40 +0000
          Re: ext3 filesize problem Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-04 05:47 +0100
            Re: ext3 filesize problem Greg Russell <me@invalid.org> - 2012-02-04 05:23 +0000
              Re: ext3 filesize problem Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-04 06:57 +0100
                Re: ext3 filesize problem Greg Russell <me@invalid.org> - 2012-02-04 07:14 +0000
                Re: ext3 filesize problem Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-04 08:32 +0100
                Re: ext3 filesize problem Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2012-02-04 09:15 +0100
                Re: ext3 filesize problem Harold Stevens <wookie@limbo.localdomain> - 2012-02-04 05:07 -0600
                Re: ext3 filesize problem Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-05 01:19 +0100
                Re: ext3 filesize problem Greg Russell <me@invalid.org> - 2012-02-05 01:34 +0000
                Re: ext3 filesize problem Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2012-02-04 07:47 -0600
                Re: ext3 filesize problem Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-04 15:24 +0000
                Re: ext3 filesize problem Greg Russell <me@invalid.org> - 2012-02-05 01:22 +0000
                Re: ext3 filesize problem J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-02-05 01:58 +0000
    Re: ext3 filesize problem Norman Peelman <npeelmandog@cfl.rr.com> - 2012-02-05 08:22 -0500

csiph-web