Hi All,
I have running Centos 6.5 32 bit machine. This machine is running qmailtoaster packages and mailbox size is 385 GB.
if i run the df -h command it show 385 GB out of 1TB
I have run the same command today suddenly shows 576 GB out of 1 TB.
I didn't update any bulk file and mail transaction is not very high.
How do i check this issue and fix it.
how do i find out and why suddenly showing this much of increasing the size of hard disk.
Could anyone help me
On 06/04/16 11:44 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Hi All,
I have running Centos 6.5 32 bit machine. This machine is running qmailtoaster packages and mailbox size is 385 GB.
if i run the df -h command it show 385 GB out of 1TB
I have run the same command today suddenly shows 576 GB out of 1 TB.
I didn't update any bulk file and mail transaction is not very high.
How do i check this issue and fix it.
how do i find out and why suddenly showing this much of increasing the size of hard disk.
Could anyone help me
Start with 'du -hs /'. If one of the directories is bigger than expected, re-run in that directory. Repeat until you find the unexpectedly large directory.
Hi Digimer,
Should i need to run above command in home directory or root. Could you help me.
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Digimer lists@alteeve.ca wrote:
On 06/04/16 11:44 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Hi All,
I have running Centos 6.5 32 bit machine. This machine is running qmailtoaster packages and mailbox size is 385 GB.
if i run the df -h command it show 385 GB out of 1TB
I have run the same command today suddenly shows 576 GB out of 1 TB.
I didn't update any bulk file and mail transaction is not very high.
How do i check this issue and fix it.
how do i find out and why suddenly showing this much of increasing the
size
of hard disk.
Could anyone help me
Start with 'du -hs /'. If one of the directories is bigger than expected, re-run in that directory. Repeat until you find the unexpectedly large directory.
-- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education? _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 12:08:45 +0800 Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Should i need to run above command in home directory or root.
The command that he gave you will work from any directory. The / means start from the root directory so where you are when you run it is irrelevant.
On 4/6/2016 9:20 PM, Frank Cox wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 12:08:45 +0800 Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Should i need to run above command in home directory or root.
The command that he gave you will work from any directory. The / means start from the root directory so where you are when you run it is irrelevant.
howevver if he doesn't run it as the root user, it won't be able to calculate space in directories the current user can't access.
if you are running X-Windows, there's a nifty utility KDirStat that scans the disk tallying space, then gives you an interactive graphical view of usage. I believe you can install it from epel as package k4dirstat
On 07/04/16 14:48, John R Pierce wrote:
if you are running X-Windows, there's a nifty utility KDirStat that scans the disk tallying space, then gives you an interactive graphical view of usage. I believe you can install it from epel as package k4dirsta
And the equivalent of that at the cli is ncdu - also from EPEL.
Hi John, /home is not mount. It's under the / root directory. sorry i had mention wrongly. / is mount in /dev/sda
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Anthony K akcentos@anroet.com wrote:
On 07/04/16 14:48, John R Pierce wrote:
if you are running X-Windows, there's a nifty utility KDirStat that scans the disk tallying space, then gives you an interactive graphical view of usage. I believe you can install it from epel as package k4dirsta
And the equivalent of that at the cli is ncdu - also from EPEL.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Hi Chandran,
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Chandran Manikandan tech2mani@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
I have running Centos 6.5 32 bit machine. This machine is running qmailtoaster packages and mailbox size is 385 GB.
if i run the df -h command it show 385 GB out of 1TB
I have run the same command today suddenly shows 576 GB out of 1 TB.
I didn't update any bulk file and mail transaction is not very high.
How do i check this issue and fix it.
how do i find out and why suddenly showing this much of increasing the size of hard disk.
Could anyone help me
Basically, df reads the superblock only and trusts it completely. du reads each object and sums them up.
Any running process can keep a deleted file open. This means the space will still be reserved and seen by df, but since du will no longer see a reference to that file in the directory tree, it cannot see those reserved blocks.
Try to see the number of open file which could be causing the problem.
--Regards Ashishkumar S. Yadav
Hi John, Am currently running dos mode not graphical mode. Could you have any other method.
Hi Ashish, You are correct. qmailtoaster backup file which was around 184 GB in backup.gz type and i have removed .bz2 type file with the same backup/mailbkup directory.
After removed .bz2 file it's gone backup.gz also which was 184 GB file. I have run this command locate .gz but couldn't find out it.
how do i see the open files.
Could you help me to find out this file or any soln.
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Ashish Yadav gwalashish@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Chandran,
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Chandran Manikandan tech2mani@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
I have running Centos 6.5 32 bit machine. This machine is running qmailtoaster packages and mailbox size is 385 GB.
if i run the df -h command it show 385 GB out of 1TB
I have run the same command today suddenly shows 576 GB out of 1 TB.
I didn't update any bulk file and mail transaction is not very high.
How do i check this issue and fix it.
how do i find out and why suddenly showing this much of increasing the
size
of hard disk.
Could anyone help me
Basically, df reads the superblock only and trusts it completely. du reads each object and sums them up.
Any running process can keep a deleted file open. This means the space will still be reserved and seen by df, but since du will no longer see a reference to that file in the directory tree, it cannot see those reserved blocks.
Try to see the number of open file which could be causing the problem.
--Regards Ashishkumar S. Yadav _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 4/6/2016 10:08 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Am currently running dos mode not graphical mode. Could you have any other method.
for unix shell (its *not* 'dos mode', MSDOS is a legacy system of Microsoft), du is the command to use.
du -hs /*
will give you a summary of the space used by every top level directory. ignore /dev /proc and /sys as they aren't real directories, theya re pseudo file systems. if it turns out, for example, that /var is the biggest pig, then
du -hs /var/*
to see the totals of whats in each folder in /var
rinse, repeat...
Hi Chandran,
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Chandran Manikandan tech2mani@gmail.com wrote:
Hi John, Am currently running dos mode not graphical mode. Could you have any other method.
Hi Ashish, You are correct. qmailtoaster backup file which was around 184 GB in backup.gz type and i have removed .bz2 type file with the same backup/mailbkup directory.
After removed .bz2 file it's gone backup.gz also which was 184 GB file. I have run this command locate .gz but couldn't find out it.
how do i see the open files.
Could you help me to find out this file or any soln.
Follow this link for more information, http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/howto-linux-get-list-of-open-files/
--Regards Ashishkumar S. Yadav
Hi John, Ashish,
Still no luck . I have tried your commands in root folder. It's showing max size 384 only in home directory.
But if i try df -h shown 579.
Is there any way to find out recycle bin folder
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Ashish Yadav gwalashish@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Chandran,
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Chandran Manikandan tech2mani@gmail.com wrote:
Hi John, Am currently running dos mode not graphical mode. Could you have any other method.
Hi Ashish, You are correct. qmailtoaster backup file which was around 184 GB in backup.gz type and i have removed .bz2 type file with the same backup/mailbkup directory.
After removed .bz2 file it's gone backup.gz also which was 184 GB file. I have run this command locate .gz but couldn't find out it.
how do i see the open files.
Could you help me to find out this file or any soln.
Follow this link for more information, http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/howto-linux-get-list-of-open-files/
--Regards Ashishkumar S. Yadav _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 4/7/2016 12:04 AM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Still no luck . I have tried your commands in root folder. It's showing max size 384 only in home directory.
But if i try df -h shown 579.
Is there any way to find out recycle bin folder
Linux shell has no such thing as a recycle bin, thats a windows thing (some linux graphical desktops might create one in for a user's files, it would be in his /home/username somewhere).
df -h shows a lot of info, for instance on one of my servers, I see...
# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/vg_free-lv_root 50G 7.7G 39G 17% / tmpfs 12G 0 12G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 477M 146M 306M 33% /boot /dev/mapper/vg_free-lv_home 30G 7.1G 23G 25% /home /dev/mapper/vg_free-lvpgsql 30G 671M 30G 3% /var/lib/pgsql /dev/mapper/vg_free-lvimages 150G 61G 90G 41% /var/lib/libvirt/images /dev/mapper/vgdata-lvhome2 1.8T 470G 1.4T 26% /home2
# du -hs /home/* 398M /home/downloads 16K /home/ipsloth 16K /home/junk 4.1G /home/observers 32M /home/pierce 2.5G /home/scac
2.5GB + 4.1 GB + the odds and ends there adds up to pretty close to the 7.1GB 'used' in the /home file system.
Hi John, Thank you.
For my system shows like below. df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 909G 576G 287G 67% / tmpfs 3.9G 0 3.9G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 3.9G 160M 3.5G 5% /boot /dev/sdb1 916G 382G 488G 44% /bkhdd
First hard disk /dev/sda Second hard disk /dev/sdb
The problem is in first hard disk show above size but my email box folders having below result.
du -hs /* 8.0K /backup 7.5M /bin *382G /bkhdd* 89M /boot 4.0K /cgroup 4.0K /command 208K /dev 79M /etc *386G /home* 4.0K /isoqlog.domains 322M /lib 20K /lost+found 4.0K /media 0 /misc 4.0K /mnt 0 /net 64M /root 14M /sbin 4.0K /selinux 4.0K /service 4.0K /srv 680K /tmp 4.3G /usr 1.9G /var
Here
/bkhdd is mount in /dev/sdb
/home is mount in /dev/sda
But the size is not match in /dev/sda
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 3:42 PM, John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
On 4/7/2016 12:04 AM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Still no luck . I have tried your commands in root folder. It's showing max size 384 only in home directory.
But if i try df -h shown 579.
Is there any way to find out recycle bin folder
Linux shell has no such thing as a recycle bin, thats a windows thing (some linux graphical desktops might create one in for a user's files, it would be in his /home/username somewhere).
df -h shows a lot of info, for instance on one of my servers, I see...
# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/vg_free-lv_root 50G 7.7G 39G 17% / tmpfs 12G 0 12G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 477M 146M 306M 33% /boot /dev/mapper/vg_free-lv_home 30G 7.1G 23G 25% /home /dev/mapper/vg_free-lvpgsql 30G 671M 30G 3% /var/lib/pgsql /dev/mapper/vg_free-lvimages 150G 61G 90G 41% /var/lib/libvirt/images /dev/mapper/vgdata-lvhome2 1.8T 470G 1.4T 26% /home2
# du -hs /home/* 398M /home/downloads 16K /home/ipsloth 16K /home/junk 4.1G /home/observers 32M /home/pierce 2.5G /home/scac
2.5GB + 4.1 GB + the odds and ends there adds up to pretty close to the 7.1GB 'used' in the /home file system.
-- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 4/7/2016 1:25 AM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
For my system shows like below. df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 909G 576G 287G 67% / tmpfs 3.9G 0 3.9G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 3.9G 160M 3.5G 5% /boot /dev/sdb1 916G 382G 488G 44% /bkhdd
.....
/bkhdd is mount in /dev/sdb
/home is mount in /dev/sda
But the size is not match in /dev/sda
I do not see a mount for /home in the file systems listed on df -h, are you sure its mounted ? it appears to just be a folder on /
On 04/06/2016 10:08 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
qmailtoaster backup file which was around 184 GB in backup.gz type and i have removed .bz2 type file with the same backup/mailbkup directory.
After removed .bz2 file it's gone backup.gz also which was 184 GB file. I have run this command locate .gz but couldn't find out it.
how do i see the open files.
You're most of the way there. You've probably identified the culprit. The backup file consumed your space, and some process still has it open so that it's not being freed on the filesystem.
As root, look for deleted files:
# ls -l /proc/*/fd/* | grep '(deleted)'
For instance, among the output on my system, I see this:
l-wx------. 1 gmessmer gmessmer 64 Apr 7 09:41 /proc/28087/fd/1 -> /home/gmessmer/tmp.1 (deleted)
The file /proc/28087/fd/1 appears as a symlink to a deleted file. In that case, the process with PID 28087 has the file open. I can use "ps" to determine what the process is, and terminate it appropriately.
Hi Tony and Gordon, Thanks for your help. I have tried above your commands I couldn't see that size of the file.
Usually the qmailbackup created like below format in backup location.
201604151929-backup.tar.gz 201604151929-qmailadminpasswd.tar.bz2 201604151929-qmailcontrolusers.tar.bz2 201604151929-spamassassin-files.tar.bz2 201604151929-squirrelmail-plugins.tar.bz2 201604151929-squirrelmail-prefs.tar.bz2 201604151929-vpopmail.sql.gz 201604151929-vpopmail.tar.bz2
Then i have tried to delete rm -f *.bz2 files or *.gz files.
The above same steps followed on 01 April files.
After that it doesn't show the 201604011929-backup.tar.gz file in backup location. but the extra 194 GB size occupied in my server which is above mentioned backup file size.
I had checked mailbox folder size 386 GB and there is no other big size folder and files in my server. But i am wonder why it shows 580GB occupied in my hard disk.
how to find out and solve this issue. I have run fail2ban and firewall also in my server. i have doubt anybody hacked or accessed my system from outside. Could anyone help me.
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:45 AM, Gordon Messmer gordon.messmer@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/06/2016 10:08 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
qmailtoaster backup file which was around 184 GB in backup.gz type and i have removed .bz2 type file with the same backup/mailbkup directory.
After removed .bz2 file it's gone backup.gz also which was 184 GB file. I have run this command locate .gz but couldn't find out it.
how do i see the open files.
You're most of the way there. You've probably identified the culprit. The backup file consumed your space, and some process still has it open so that it's not being freed on the filesystem.
As root, look for deleted files:
# ls -l /proc/*/fd/* | grep '(deleted)'
For instance, among the output on my system, I see this:
l-wx------. 1 gmessmer gmessmer 64 Apr 7 09:41 /proc/28087/fd/1 -> /home/gmessmer/tmp.1 (deleted)
The file /proc/28087/fd/1 appears as a symlink to a deleted file. In that case, the process with PID 28087 has the file open. I can use "ps" to determine what the process is, and terminate it appropriately.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 04/17/2016 09:27 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Thanks for your help. I have tried above your commands I couldn't see that size of the file.
What commands? I suggested that you look for deleted but open files using: # ls -l /proc/*/fd/* | grep '(deleted)'
If you see any, you won't see their size. All you'll really see is the PID of the process that has the files open, and in that case, you must terminate that process.
Do you see deleted files when you run the command above?
On Mon, April 18, 2016 1:02 pm, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/17/2016 09:27 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Thanks for your help. I have tried above your commands I couldn't see that size of the file.
What commands? I suggested that you look for deleted but open files using: # ls -l /proc/*/fd/* | grep '(deleted)'
If you see any, you won't see their size. All you'll really see is the PID of the process that has the files open, and in that case, you must terminate that process.
Do you see deleted files when you run the command above?
lsof command may be of help either...
Valeri
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On 04/18/16 13:07, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Mon, April 18, 2016 1:02 pm, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/17/2016 09:27 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Thanks for your help. I have tried above your commands I couldn't see that size of the file.
What commands? I suggested that you look for deleted but open files using: # ls -l /proc/*/fd/* | grep '(deleted)'
If you see any, you won't see their size. All you'll really see is the PID of the process that has the files open, and in that case, you must terminate that process.
Do you see deleted files when you run the command above?
lsof command may be of help either...
===> lsof | grep deleted would work better. ;-)
On 04/18/16 13:31, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/18/2016 11:17 AM, g wrote:
lsof | grep deleted would work better.
Better how?
===>
'lsof', aka, list open files, will list every open file on system, and there are a lot.
'grep deleted' will list _only_ the deleted files that are still open.
lsof hasn't always been installed by default, while /proc is pretty reliably available.
===>
install lsof if not installed.
On 04/18/2016 01:18 PM, g wrote:
'lsof', aka, list open files, will list every open file on system, and there are a lot.
'grep deleted' will list_only_ the deleted files that are still open.
That's exactly the same thing that "ls -l /proc/*/fd/* | grep '(deleted)'" will do. So how is lsof better, exactly?
I know. I'm frustrated today. I spent the weekend dealing with people nit-picking. It's hard to exaggerate how much time and energy can be wasted by people insisting on meaningless changes.
On 04/18/16 15:45, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/18/2016 01:18 PM, g wrote:
'lsof', aka, list open files, will list every open file on system, and there are a lot.
'grep deleted' will list_only_ the deleted files that are still open.
That's exactly the same thing that "ls -l /proc/*/fd/* | grep '(deleted)'" will do. So how is lsof better, exactly?
===>
i did not say it was. i was only correcting Valerie's post.
I know. I'm frustrated today. I spent the weekend dealing with people nit-picking. It's hard to exaggerate how much time and energy can be wasted by people insisting on meaningless changes.
===>
post was not to be nit-picking.
adding 'grep deleted' is not meaningless.
now, can we get back to op's problem?
On Mon, April 18, 2016 4:22 pm, g wrote:
On 04/18/16 15:45, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/18/2016 01:18 PM, g wrote:
'lsof', aka, list open files, will list every open file on system, and there are a lot.
'grep deleted' will list_only_ the deleted files that are still open.
That's exactly the same thing that "ls -l /proc/*/fd/* | grep '(deleted)'" will do. So how is lsof better, exactly?
===>
i did not say it was. i was only correcting Valerie's post.
Thanks, I was kind of indulging my laziness, mentioned the command name and assumed keen person will look up command usage him/herself. But on a receiving end being lazy person I would prefer to just copy and paste using _your_ post as opposed to my own ;-)
Valeri
I know. I'm frustrated today. I spent the weekend dealing with people nit-picking. It's hard to exaggerate how much time and energy can be wasted by people insisting on meaningless changes.
===>
post was not to be nit-picking.
adding 'grep deleted' is not meaningless.
now, can we get back to op's problem?
-- peace out.
If Bill Gates got a dime for every time Windows crashes... ...oh, wait. He does. THAT explains it! -+- in a world with out fences, who needs gates.
CentOS GNU/Linux 6.7
tc,hago.
g .
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On 04/18/16 17:26, Valeri Galtsev wrote: <>
Thanks, I was kind of indulging my laziness, mentioned the command name and assumed keen person will look up command usage him/herself. But on a receiving end being lazy person I would prefer to just copy and paste using _your_ post as opposed to my own ;-)
===> welcome and welcome to the 'lzpc', lazy people club'. charter members excuse it as terse. B-)
being aware aware of your knowledge from your past post, i was a bit amazed at your reply.
there is nothing wrong c&p. i am of habit when opportunity presents itself. it lessens typos and need for thinking about spelling.
also good for adding a list member's name to my email address book. ;-)
On 04/18/2016 03:45 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/18/2016 01:18 PM, g wrote:
'lsof', aka, list open files, will list every open file on system, and there are a lot.
'grep deleted' will list_only_ the deleted files that are still open.
That's exactly the same thing that "ls -l /proc/*/fd/* | grep '(deleted)'" will do. So how is lsof better, exactly?
lsof will show the sizes of the deleted files.
lsof | grep deleted | sort -k7n
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Robert Nichols rnicholsNOSPAM@comcast.net wrote:
lsof will show the sizes of the deleted files.
lsof | grep deleted | sort -k7n
That's a reasonable G.D. answer.
The only problem is that on my system, the default output includes a TID column that is present in only some of the lines, so the size column is 8 for many lines and 7 for the others, so sort doesn't work as expected unless you change lsof's output.
And you probably should "grep ' (deleted)$' unless you want to see files like /home/gordon/.thunderbird/xxxxxxx.default/calendar-data/deleted.sqlite.
Still, I guess I learned one thing.
Dear Friends,
Finally fixed my issue. As you told i have unmount the external hard disk then i checked the /bkhdd/backup folder. I saw that 190GB backup tar.gz file then i deleted and again remount it.
Thanks a lot for your kind supporting to me to fix this issue.
Why it's happened like this environment and how to avoid it.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Gordon Messmer gordon.messmer@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Robert Nichols rnicholsNOSPAM@comcast.net wrote:
lsof will show the sizes of the deleted files.
lsof | grep deleted | sort -k7nThat's a reasonable G.D. answer.
The only problem is that on my system, the default output includes a TID column that is present in only some of the lines, so the size column is 8 for many lines and 7 for the others, so sort doesn't work as expected unless you change lsof's output.
And you probably should "grep ' (deleted)$' unless you want to see files like /home/gordon/.thunderbird/xxxxxxx.default/calendar-data/deleted.sqlite.
Still, I guess I learned one thing. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 4/21/2016 7:49 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Finally fixed my issue. As you told i have unmount the external hard disk then i checked the /bkhdd/backup folder. I saw that 190GB backup tar.gz file then i deleted and again remount it.
Thanks a lot for your kind supporting to me to fix this issue.
Why it's happened like this environment and how to avoid it.
don't write to mount points when they aren't mounted, the files get written to the file system. and don't create any directories in the mount point... like, if you were mounting /dev/sdb1 as /bkhdd then on the root file ssytem (without that mount) there should never have been any /bkhdd/backup directory. in fact /bkhdd should not be writable by your user processes.
I remember older Unix systems would refuse to mount a file system to a non-empty directory, for exactly this reason, it hides stuff thats already there.
On Thu, April 21, 2016 10:23 pm, John R Pierce wrote:
On 4/21/2016 7:49 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Finally fixed my issue. As you told i have unmount the external hard disk then i checked the /bkhdd/backup folder. I saw that 190GB backup tar.gz file then i deleted and again remount it.
Thanks a lot for your kind supporting to me to fix this issue.
Why it's happened like this environment and how to avoid it.
don't write to mount points when they aren't mounted, the files get written to the file system. and don't create any directories in the mount point... like, if you were mounting /dev/sdb1 as /bkhdd then on the root file ssytem (without that mount) there should never have been any /bkhdd/backup directory. in fact /bkhdd should not be writable by your user processes.
John, thanks for reminding this to all of us, I for one keep forgetting about it (at least if I'm not dealing with it myself which usually acts as a federal offense on me ;-) I know one Linux admin who removes write bit from mount points.
Valeri
I remember older Unix systems would refuse to mount a file system to a non-empty directory, for exactly this reason, it hides stuff thats already there.
-- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On 04/22/2016 03:34 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Thu, April 21, 2016 10:23 pm, John R Pierce wrote:
On 4/21/2016 7:49 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Finally fixed my issue. As you told i have unmount the external hard disk then i checked the /bkhdd/backup folder. I saw that 190GB backup tar.gz file then i deleted and again remount it.
Thanks a lot for your kind supporting to me to fix this issue.
Why it's happened like this environment and how to avoid it.
don't write to mount points when they aren't mounted, the files get written to the file system. and don't create any directories in the mount point... like, if you were mounting /dev/sdb1 as /bkhdd then on the root file ssytem (without that mount) there should never have been any /bkhdd/backup directory. in fact /bkhdd should not be writable by your user processes.
John, thanks for reminding this to all of us, I for one keep forgetting about it (at least if I'm not dealing with it myself which usually acts as a federal offense on me ;-) I know one Linux admin who removes write bit from mount points.
I usually put a file with a name like "mount point for /dev/mdxyz" into that mount point folder just in case I fail to mount it. Then when you do a ls or ll it shows me I have a problem.
Valeri
I remember older Unix systems would refuse to mount a file system to a non-empty directory, for exactly this reason, it hides stuff thats already there.
-- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 04/21/2016 07:49 PM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Why it's happened like this environment and how to avoid it.
Generally the way to avoid it would be for your backup application to fail if the destination does not exist, and alert the admin.
For instance, rsnapshot has the "no_create_root" option to do exactly that.
If you're making backups with scripts of your own, just start with something like: test -d $destination || alert_admin_and_exit
...where $destination is a sub-directory under the mount point. Backing up directly to the mount point can make it more complicated to detect the presence of the mounted filesystem.
In article CAJqDrFiXWBwj5o+gPxtib4T41qN9Yrhe2uJtA0UVntoqqCWP_w@mail.gmail.com, Chandran Manikandan tech2mani@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
I have running Centos 6.5 32 bit machine. This machine is running qmailtoaster packages and mailbox size is 385 GB.
if i run the df -h command it show 385 GB out of 1TB
I have run the same command today suddenly shows 576 GB out of 1 TB.
I didn't update any bulk file and mail transaction is not very high.
How do i check this issue and fix it.
how do i find out and why suddenly showing this much of increasing the size of hard disk.
You can look to see what files have been created or altered in the last day by using "find" (as root):
# find / -xdev -type f -ctime -1 -ls
For the last 2 days, change the -1 to -2
You can read "man find" to understand the options.
This will only show you files that still exist in the filesystem. If a large file has been created and is still held open although deleted (unlinked), it will not show up. But in that case, you can either search for it with "lsof", or just reboot the system to reclaim the space.
Cheers Tony
On 04/06/16 22:44, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Hi All,
I have running Centos 6.5 32 bit machine. This machine is running qmailtoaster packages and mailbox size is 385 GB.
if i run the df -h command it show 385 GB out of 1TB
===> please post results.
I have run the same command today suddenly shows 576 GB out of 1 TB.
I didn't update any bulk file and mail transaction is not very high.
How do i check this issue and fix it.
===> why do you believe that increase is related to gmailtoaster?
how do i find out and why suddenly showing this much of increasing the size of hard disk.
===>
Could anyone help me
===> have you at any time run kde?
ria, i use kde and some time back, found that depending on how a file or directory is deleted, deletion is saved in cache.
is it possible that gnome is doing same?
Hi Geleem, Please have a look below of my result.
For my system shows like below. df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 909G 576G 287G 67% / tmpfs 3.9G 0 3.9G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 3.9G 160M 3.5G 5% /boot /dev/sdb1 916G 382G 488G 44% /bkhdd
First hard disk /dev/sda Second hard disk /dev/sdb
The problem is in first hard disk show above size but my email box folders having below result.
du -hs /* 8.0K /backup 7.5M /bin *382G /bkhdd* 89M /boot 4.0K /cgroup 4.0K /command 208K /dev 79M /etc *386G /home* 4.0K /isoqlog.domains 322M /lib 20K /lost+found 4.0K /media 0 /misc 4.0K /mnt 0 /net 64M /root 14M /sbin 4.0K /selinux 4.0K /service 4.0K /srv 680K /tmp 4.3G /usr 1.9G /var
Here
/bkhdd is mount in /dev/sdb
/ is mount in /dev/sda
But the size is not match in /dev/sda
I am running Centos 6.5 32 bit with CLI Mode. How do i check the cache size in this mode.
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 2:29 PM, g geleem@bellsouth.net wrote:
On 04/06/16 22:44, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Hi All,
I have running Centos 6.5 32 bit machine. This machine is running qmailtoaster packages and mailbox size is 385 GB.
if i run the df -h command it show 385 GB out of 1TB
===> please post results.
I have run the same command today suddenly shows 576 GB out of 1 TB.
I didn't update any bulk file and mail transaction is not very high.
How do i check this issue and fix it.
===> why do you believe that increase is related to gmailtoaster?
how do i find out and why suddenly showing this much of increasing the
size
of hard disk.
===>
Could anyone help me
===> have you at any time run kde?
ria, i use kde and some time back, found that depending on how a file or directory is deleted, deletion is saved in cache.
is it possible that gnome is doing same?
-- peace out.
If Bill Gates got a dime for every time Windows crashes... ...oh, wait. He does. THAT explains it! -+- in a world with out fences, who needs gates.
CentOS GNU/Linux 6.7
tc,hago.
g .
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 04/18/16 04:47, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Hi Geleem, Please have a look below of my result.
For my system shows like below. df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 909G 576G 287G 67% / tmpfs 3.9G 0 3.9G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 3.9G 160M 3.5G 5% /boot /dev/sdb1 916G 382G 488G 44% /bkhdd
First hard disk /dev/sda Second hard disk /dev/sdb
===> ok. look at size from a diff perspective.
in a virtual terminal, enter df -H, then df -h, followed by df -k.
are you sizes closer with "-k" ?
if in wonder, open second v-term, enter man df to get an understanding of how block size and rounding cause interesting results.
same applies to du.
neither have a -b to see actual bytes, which i believe is because disk usage is by blocks, not bytes.
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:47:33PM +0800, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Hi Geleem, Please have a look below of my result.
For my system shows like below. df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 909G 576G 287G 67% / tmpfs 3.9G 0 3.9G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 3.9G 160M 3.5G 5% /boot /dev/sdb1 916G 382G 488G 44% /bkhdd
First hard disk /dev/sda Second hard disk /dev/sdb
The problem is in first hard disk show above size but my email box folders having below result.
du -hs /*
Do you have any dot (.XXX) directories or large files under / ? These would not be measured by "du -hs /*".
8.0K /backup 7.5M /bin *382G /bkhdd* 89M /boot 4.0K /cgroup 4.0K /command 208K /dev 79M /etc *386G /home* 4.0K /isoqlog.domains 322M /lib 20K /lost+found 4.0K /media 0 /misc 4.0K /mnt 0 /net 64M /root 14M /sbin 4.0K /selinux 4.0K /service 4.0K /srv 680K /tmp 4.3G /usr 1.9G /var
Here
/bkhdd is mount in /dev/sdb
/ is mount in /dev/sda
But the size is not match in /dev/sda
I am running Centos 6.5 32 bit with CLI Mode. How do i check the cache size in this mode.
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 2:29 PM, g geleem@bellsouth.net wrote:
On 04/06/16 22:44, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
Hi All,
I have running Centos 6.5 32 bit machine. This machine is running qmailtoaster packages and mailbox size is 385 GB.
if i run the df -h command it show 385 GB out of 1TB
===> please post results.
I have run the same command today suddenly shows 576 GB out of 1 TB.
I didn't update any bulk file and mail transaction is not very high.
How do i check this issue and fix it.
===> why do you believe that increase is related to gmailtoaster?
how do i find out and why suddenly showing this much of increasing the
size
of hard disk.
===>
Could anyone help me
===> have you at any time run kde?
ria, i use kde and some time back, found that depending on how a file or directory is deleted, deletion is saved in cache.
is it possible that gnome is doing same?
-- peace out.
If Bill Gates got a dime for every time Windows crashes... ...oh, wait. He does. THAT explains it! -+- in a world with out fences, who needs gates.
CentOS GNU/Linux 6.7
tc,hago.
g .
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
-- *Thanks,* *Manikandan.C* *System Administrator* _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
End of included message <<<
On 04/18/2016 02:47 AM, Chandran Manikandan wrote:
For my system shows like below. df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 909G 576G 287G 67% / tmpfs 3.9G 0 3.9G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 3.9G 160M 3.5G 5% /boot /dev/sdb1 916G 382G 488G 44% /bkhdd
Unmount /bkhdd temporarily, and then run "du -hs /*" again. One possibility is that you ran a backup while /dev/sdb1 was not mounted, and now you are consuming a bunch of space that you can't see because you've mounted another filesystem on top of it.
-
Anthony K -
Ashish Yadav -
Chandran Manikandan -
Digimer -
Frank Cox -
g -
Gordon Messmer -
John R Pierce -
Jon LaBadie -
Rob Kampen -
Robert Nichols -
tony＠softins.co.uk -
Valeri Galtsev