The discrepancies between lfs df -h and df -h I think that largely
have to do with the way GB are calculated. Ether based on 1000 or
1024. Remember you lose about 5% of each underlying volume due to the
5% reserved for root.
Aaron
On Feb 12, 2008, at 8:38 AM, Timh Bergström wrote:
Hi,
Just got a smaller Lustre system running with 1 mdt/mgs and 2 ost's.
On the osts i've added 1x10GB disk and 1x20GB disk
on each system and formatted and mounted them as /mnt/ost1-4 (ost1)
and /mnt/ost2-3 (ost2). I've also mounted the lustre system on the
mdt/mgs server with mount -t lustre [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/testfs /mnt/lustre.
So far so good, however df -h only reports 9/60GB avail where lsf df
-h reports 54.4G available.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/testfs
60G 50G 9.0G 85% /mnt/lustre
vs
filesystem summary: 59.1G 4.7G 54.4G 7% /mnt/lustre
--
lustre-client:/mnt/lustre# du -hcs
4.0K .
4.0K total
I cant find anything on this in the lists or manual, but do you
have to have equal size disks to get all the usable space available
to the system mounting lustre? Is this somehow connected to stripe-
size or some automatic failover settings. My original intent was to
create a large storage area using lustre for numerous clients to
mount and use as diskspace.
--
Timh Bergström
System Administrator
Diino AB - www.diino.com
:wq _______________________________________________
Lustre-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
Aaron Knister
Associate Systems Analyst
Center for Ocean-Land-Atmosphere Studies
(301) 595-7000
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Lustre-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
