Re: [Help-gnunet] Re: gnunetd suddenly very unstable

[Christian Grothoff]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 27 September 2002 02:04 pm, you wrote:
>
> that would mean all data that i haven't inserted myself would be lost,
> wouldn't it? :-(

Data that was inserted would be lost, but it's likely that you INDEXED all of 
your data, and the indexed files will be re-indexed by gnunet-check -a.

> but, one thing: i saw the following now:
>
> address@hidden data]$ ll
> total 2099084
> drwxrwxr-x    2 zottel   zottel       4096 Aug 10 18:42 content
> -rw-------    1 zottel   zottel   2147480617 Sep 27 00:52 content.gdb
> drwxr-xr-x    2 zottel   zottel       8192 Sep 25 20:36 credit
> drwxr-xr-x    2 zottel   zottel       4096 Sep 26 23:28 hosts
>
> content.gdb has exactly the size of 2G. wasn't that the limit for a single
> file on an ext2/ext3 fs? to me it seems as if filesize was the problem
> rather than anything else. comments?

Sounds very likely. Did you really *INSERT* data at the order of 2 GB!? (not 
index!). This could very well be a gdbm limitation (even if the FS supports 
more, gdbm may not). I have definitely never tried to insert the amount of 
data into gdbm that would even get close to 2 GB. 

Christian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9lKxr9tNtMeXQLkIRAt7KAJ90aFmobtkHCnZreqo6wp4zfwq8yQCggSHw
P7B5GCgTwOHgrSrJQ0f/DpM=
=gQ+9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----