Can anyone help make sense of this? This is an ext3 partition. It's only showing 403GB out of 426GB used, but then it says only 632MB available? Where'd the extra ~25GB go?
[scarolan@server]$ df -H /disks/vrac5
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sdb2 426GB 403GB 632MB 100% /disks/vrac5
Sean Carolan wrote:
Can anyone help make sense of this? This is an ext3 partition. It's only showing 403GB out of 426GB used, but then it says only 632MB available? Where'd the extra ~25GB go?
Those are the ~ 5% which are automatically reserved for root ...
man tune2fs
Ralph
On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 15:09 +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Sean Carolan wrote:
Can anyone help make sense of this? This is an ext3 partition. It's only showing 403GB out of 426GB used, but then it says only 632MB available? Where'd the extra ~25GB go?
Those are the ~ 5% which are automatically reserved for root ...
man tune2fs
Further, there is some overhead for i-nodes and what not. I don't recall if that is included or excluded in/from the df calculations.
A "df -i" will likely show a *very* large number of available i-nodes and a small percent used. I've many times made a file system and reduced the number of i-nodes substantially and gained a *lot* of space. Due diligence is required: the profile of number of files, average files sizes, temporary files during busiest parts of the day, ... must be taken into consideration to derive a "safe" usable number. Get wrong and you'll need some aspirin for the headache.
Also, when making the file system, reducing the amount reserved for root is usually safe on today's larger drives, especially on a relatively stable system/user base/file/system usage.
Ralph
<snip sig stuff>
William L. Maltby wrote on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:26:21 -0400:
Also, when making the file system, reducing the amount reserved for root is usually safe on today's larger drives, especially on a relatively stable system/user base/file/system usage.
I gather this can't be done after creation?
Kai
Also, when making the file system, reducing the amount reserved for root is usually safe on today's larger drives, especially on a relatively stable system/user base/file/system usage.
I gather this can't be done after creation? Kai
Remember: You can tune a file system, but you can't tune a fish.
% man tune2fs
The "-m" option.
/jens
On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 16:38 +0200, Jens Larsson wrote:
Also, when making the file system, reducing the amount reserved for root is usually safe on today's larger drives, especially on a relatively stable system/user base/file/system usage.
I gather this can't be done after creation? Kai
Remember: You can tune a file system, but you can't tune a fish.
Hootie and the Blowfish? They can be tuned! ;-)
% man tune2fs
The "-m" option.
or the -r option.
/jens
--
<snip sig stuff>
On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 16:31 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
William L. Maltby wrote on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:26:21 -0400:
Also, when making the file system, reducing the amount reserved for root is usually safe on today's larger drives, especially on a relatively stable system/user base/file/system usage.
I gather this can't be done after creation?
Yes it can be adjusted. But since I used to do so much of this sort of thing, it became second nature to do it at file creation time. "Man tune2fs" has the details for adjusting by percentage or block count.
Kai
William L. Maltby wrote on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:59:05 -0400:
Yes it can be adjusted. But since I used to do so much of this sort of thing, it became second nature to do it at file creation time. "Man tune2fs" has the details for adjusting by percentage or block count.
Great, thanks. Just in case I need it one day :-)
Kai
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
William L. Maltby wrote on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:26:21 -0400:
Also, when making the file system, reducing the amount reserved for root is usually safe on today's larger drives, especially on a relatively stable system/user base/file/system usage.
I gather this can't be done after creation?
That's why I said "man tune2fs" >:)
Yes, it can.
Cheers,
Ralph