Re: Disk Usage
On 23 April 2010 12:24, Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote: On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 12:06:14 -0400 ill...@gmail.com ill...@gmail.com articulated: 64bit executables are going to be larger, sometimes as much as 2x, but do you now have a bunch of (large) /boot/kernel/*.symbols files now? I have 1115 total files in that directory. It appears that half of them are *.symbols files. I'm pretty sure that you don't actually need those for day to day running (I assume they have something to do with GDB). They can pretty safely be rm(1)ed. -- -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk Usage
Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net writes: I just did a fresh install of FreeBSD-8.0/amd64. Previously, I had FreeBSD-7.3/i386 installed. It appears the the size of / has increased dramatically. $ df -H Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1a1.0G527M428M55%/ devfs 1.0k1.0k 0B 100%/dev /dev/ad0s1d520M 18k478M 0%/tmp /dev/ad0s1e236G6.0G212G 3%/usr /dev/ad1s1d238G720M218G 0%/var When I attempted to build World and a new kernel after first installing 8.0, I received an error that / was at 106% and the process stopped. I reinstalled 8.0 and increased the size to 1.0G and now everything appears to be working correctly. In my old installation, the root directory only used a minuscule amount of space. Why has it increased so dramatically in 8.0/amd64? New modules, mostly. -- Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer, Boston area http://be-well.ilk.org/~lowell/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk Usage
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 11:26:02 -0400 Lowell freebsd-questions-lo...@be-well.ilk.org articulated: Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net writes: I just did a fresh install of FreeBSD-8.0/amd64. Previously, I had FreeBSD-7.3/i386 installed. It appears the the size of / has increased dramatically. $ df -H Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1a1.0G527M428M55%/ devfs 1.0k1.0k 0B 100%/dev /dev/ad0s1d520M 18k478M 0%/tmp /dev/ad0s1e236G6.0G212G 3%/usr /dev/ad1s1d238G720M218G 0%/var When I attempted to build World and a new kernel after first installing 8.0, I received an error that / was at 106% and the process stopped. I reinstalled 8.0 and increased the size to 1.0G and now everything appears to be working correctly. In my old installation, the root directory only used a minuscule amount of space. Why has it increased so dramatically in 8.0/amd64? New modules, mostly. OK, in that case, the install utility should be updated to allocate a larger share to the root directory. As I stated, I ran out of room while doing an initial World/Kernel build. Perhaps a mention in the documentation would also be beneficial. Just my 2¢. -- Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ Leave no stone unturned. Euripides signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Disk Usage
On 22 April 2010 12:02, Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote: I just did a fresh install of FreeBSD-8.0/amd64. Previously, I had FreeBSD-7.3/i386 installed. It appears the the size of / has increased dramatically. $ df -H Filesystem Size Used Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1a 1.0G 527M 428M 55% / devfs 1.0k 1.0k 0B 100% /dev /dev/ad0s1d 520M 18k 478M 0% /tmp /dev/ad0s1e 236G 6.0G 212G 3% /usr /dev/ad1s1d 238G 720M 218G 0% /var When I attempted to build World and a new kernel after first installing 8.0, I received an error that / was at 106% and the process stopped. I reinstalled 8.0 and increased the size to 1.0G and now everything appears to be working correctly. In my old installation, the root directory only used a minuscule amount of space. Why has it increased so dramatically in 8.0/amd64? 64bit executables are going to be larger, sometimes as much as 2x, but do you now have a bunch of (large) /boot/kernel/*.symbols files now? -- -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk Usage
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 12:06:14 -0400 ill...@gmail.com ill...@gmail.com articulated: 64bit executables are going to be larger, sometimes as much as 2x, but do you now have a bunch of (large) /boot/kernel/*.symbols files now? I have 1115 total files in that directory. It appears that half of them are *.symbols files. -- Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax. Albert Einstein signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Disk Usage
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 11:18:57 -0500 (CDT) Mark tingu...@casselton.net articulated: The command (as root) will show which directories in the root partition use the most space: # du -kx / | sort -n Sometime install will backup the boot kernel directory. Multiple /boot/kernel* directories can quickly eat up space. / $ sudo du -kx / | sort -n 1 /dev 2 /.snap 2 /boot/firmware 2 /boot/zfs 2 /cdrom 2 /etc/ntp 2 /etc/skel 2 /etc/ssl/demoCA/crl 2 /etc/zfs 2 /media 2 /mnt 2 /proc 2 /tmp 2 /usr 2 /var 4 /etc/devd 4 /etc/gnats 4 /etc/ppp 4 /etc/ssl/demoCA/certs 6 /etc/gss 6 /etc/periodic/monthly 6 /etc/ssl/demoCA/private 8 /etc/bluetooth 10 /etc/X11 10 /etc/ssl/demoCA/newcerts 14 /etc/periodic/weekly 14 /etc/ssl/apache-certs 16 /root/kernels 24 /boot/defaults 34 /root 36 /etc/pam.d 36 /etc/security 40 /etc/periodic/security 42 /etc/ssl/demoCA 54 /etc/defaults 56 /etc/periodic/daily 74 /etc/mtree 94 /etc/ssl 118 /etc/periodic 144 /etc/ssh 252 /etc/mail 336 /lib/geom 386 /etc/rc.d 1026/libexec 1152/bin 1888/etc 4416/rescue 5240/sbin 7586/lib 12884 /boot/modules 238354 /boot/kernel.old 240616 /boot/kernel 492826 /boot 514199 / I am assuming that I can safely delete the contents of /boot/kernel.old. It is not that I am in dire need of space but rather I do not want to risk running out of space in root again. Next time I will allocate at least 2G to root. $ df -cih Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on /dev/ad0s1a989M502M408M55%2.9k 138k2% / devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100% 0 0 100% /dev /dev/ad0s1d496M 18K456M 0% 15 66k0% /tmp /dev/ad0s1e220G6.1G196G 3%371k 29M1% /usr /dev/ad1s1d222G737M203G 0% 28k 30M0% /var total 443G7.3G401G 2%402k 60M1% -- Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk Usage
ill...@gmail.com wrote: On 22 April 2010 12:02, Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote: I just did a fresh install of FreeBSD-8.0/amd64. Previously, I had FreeBSD-7.3/i386 installed. It appears the the size of / has increased dramatically. $ df -H Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1a1.0G527M428M55%/ devfs 1.0k1.0k 0B 100%/dev /dev/ad0s1d520M 18k478M 0%/tmp /dev/ad0s1e236G6.0G212G 3%/usr /dev/ad1s1d238G720M218G 0%/var When I attempted to build World and a new kernel after first installing 8.0, I received an error that / was at 106% and the process stopped. I reinstalled 8.0 and increased the size to 1.0G and now everything appears to be working correctly. In my old installation, the root directory only used a minuscule amount of space. Why has it increased so dramatically in 8.0/amd64? 64bit executables are going to be larger, sometimes as much as 2x, but do you now have a bunch of (large) /boot/kernel/*.symbols files now? You can comment out 'makeoptionsDEBUG=-g' from your kernel config file, along with all other debugging facilities and set WITHOUT_PROFILE= true in src.conf. I also have STRIP= -s in my make.conf, but IIRC this should only apply to ports builds. The downside to this is if you need to do some serious troubleshooting you're screwed. On production boxen I run Release versions, and only do security updates/patches or upgrade to the next Release. In the past using the most quiescent code has been good to me. After two kernel builds/installs the huge GENERIC gets moved out of the way. My i386 box has 91MB of space used in / and the 64 bit boxen are typically about 93-95MB. I only have one i386 box left and it's crunched down kernel is 4.2MB, and my 64 bit ones average around 4.5MB. This can be an effective strategy to mitigate a / being too small, but at the cost of reducing one's ability to get down and dirty troubleshooting code bugs. -Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Disk Usage
I just did a fresh install of FreeBSD-8.0/amd64. Previously, I had FreeBSD-7.3/i386 installed. It appears the the size of / has increased dramatically. $ df -H Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1a1.0G527M428M55%/ devfs 1.0k1.0k 0B 100%/dev /dev/ad0s1d520M 18k478M 0%/tmp /dev/ad0s1e236G6.0G212G 3%/usr /dev/ad1s1d238G720M218G 0%/var When I attempted to build World and a new kernel after first installing 8.0, I received an error that / was at 106% and the process stopped. I reinstalled 8.0 and increased the size to 1.0G and now everything appears to be working correctly. In my old installation, the root directory only used a minuscule amount of space. Why has it increased so dramatically in 8.0/amd64? -- Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ Never count your chickens before they rip your lips off. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
discrepancies in disk usage between df and du
Hi, I have a box (7.2-STABLE, amd64) that is currently showing some disk usage problems. It all started with apache generating huge logs from one of the mod_perl applications that is undergoing testing. So the /var partition was getting full. We removed all logs that were causing the problem, but even though du shows some 700 Mb of usage, df shows that the disk is full (-1.5 Gb): [fer...@omega ~] sudo du -hc -d1 /var/ Password: 2.0K/var/.snap 423M/var/account 6.0K/var/at 2.0K/var/audit 18K/var/backups 4.0K/var/crash 6.0K/var/cron 53M/var/db 2.0K/var/empty 2.0K/var/heimdal 219M/var/log 14M/var/mail 4.0K/var/msgs 48K/var/named 2.0K/var/preserve 44K/var/run 2.0K/var/rwho 16K/var/spool 76K/var/tmp 24K/var/yp 2.0K/var/games 710M/var/ 710Mtotal [fer...@omega ~] df -h FilesystemSizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/mirror/gm0s1f 18G 18G -1.5G 109%/var I've been googling around, and I understand why df and du might be reporting disk usage differently. However, I can't solve this issue and reclaim unused disk space ... applications (apache, mod_perl) are prevented to write to /var and this is causing us problems. We've already tried rebooting the box, restarting the syslog, newsyslog daemons, to no avail. df keeps showing 100% disk usage (-1.5 Gb of remaining disk space) in all cases. We've even rebooted the box with all apache instances turned off in rc.conf ... i.e. without any but the most basic services running (sshd) ... This box is essentially a web server, no other services are being run. Any suggestions as to what to try next? Thanks in advance, -- fernan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: discrepancies in disk usage between df and du
You have a file locking problem. du shows disk in use, but df shows disk committed. Use lsof to identify the file that has disk space reserved but no longer exists. man (8) lsof --On February 12, 2010 5:39:44 PM -0300 Fernan Aguero fernan.agu...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I have a box (7.2-STABLE, amd64) that is currently showing some disk usage problems. It all started with apache generating huge logs from one of the mod_perl applications that is undergoing testing. So the /var partition was getting full. We removed all logs that were causing the problem, but even though du shows some 700 Mb of usage, df shows that the disk is full (-1.5 Gb): [fer...@omega ~] sudo du -hc -d1 /var/ Password: 2.0K/var/.snap 423M/var/account 6.0K/var/at 2.0K/var/audit 18K/var/backups 4.0K/var/crash 6.0K/var/cron 53M/var/db 2.0K/var/empty 2.0K/var/heimdal 219M/var/log 14M/var/mail 4.0K/var/msgs 48K/var/named 2.0K/var/preserve 44K/var/run 2.0K/var/rwho 16K/var/spool 76K/var/tmp 24K/var/yp 2.0K/var/games 710M/var/ 710Mtotal [fer...@omega ~] df -h FilesystemSizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/mirror/gm0s1f 18G 18G -1.5G 109%/var I've been googling around, and I understand why df and du might be reporting disk usage differently. However, I can't solve this issue and reclaim unused disk space ... applications (apache, mod_perl) are prevented to write to /var and this is causing us problems. We've already tried rebooting the box, restarting the syslog, newsyslog daemons, to no avail. df keeps showing 100% disk usage (-1.5 Gb of remaining disk space) in all cases. We've even rebooted the box with all apache instances turned off in rc.conf ... i.e. without any but the most basic services running (sshd) ... This box is essentially a web server, no other services are being run. Any suggestions as to what to try next? Thanks in advance, Paul Schmehl, If it isn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer. ** WARNING: Check the headers before replying ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: discrepancies in disk usage between df and du
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote: You have a file locking problem. du shows disk in use, but df shows disk committed. Use lsof to identify the file that has disk space reserved but no longer exists. man (8) lsof Thanks Paul for the suggestion. I've tried both lsof and fstat, and can't really see anything wrong in the output ... 1. Can't install lsof from ports, apparently === Registering installation for lsof-4.83C,4 /var: write failed, filesystem is full cp: /var/db/pkg/lsof-4.83C,4/+MTREE_DIRS: No space left on device *** Error code 1 I say 'apparently' because in spite of the error message, /var/db/pkg gets written anyway: omega# ls -l /var/db/pkg/lsof-4.83C,4/ total 6 -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel57 Feb 13 01:22 +COMMENT -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 1435 Feb 13 01:22 +CONTENTS -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 386 Feb 13 01:22 +DESC -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 0 Feb 13 01:22 +MTREE_DIRS And lsof is installed at /usr/local/sbin/lsof, as expected. 2. Let's see what lsof shows: omega# lsof +D /var/ COMMANDPID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE/OFFNODE NAME devd 464 root4u unix 0xff0005d03b40 0t0 /var/run/devd.pipe devd 464 root5w VREG 0,943 47122 /var/run/devd.pid sendmail 804 root cwd VDIR 0,94 512 1295363 /var/spool/mqueue sendmail 804 root5w VREG 0,94 78 47115 /var/run/sendmail.pid sendmail 808 smmsp cwd VDIR 0,94 512 1295366 /var/spool/clientmqueue sendmail 808 smmsp4w VREG 0,940 1295368 /var/spool/clientmqueue/sm-client.pid cron 814 root cwd VDIR 0,94 512 23552 /var/cron cron 814 root3w VREG 0,943 47117 /var/run/cron.pid csh 6741 paula cwd VDIR 0,94 4096 117760 /var/log syslogd 70526 root3w VREG 0,945 47111 /var/run/syslog.pid syslogd 70526 root4u unix 0xff0024a00b40 0t0 /var/run/log syslogd 70526 root5u unix 0xff0013ee9870 0t0 /var/run/logpriv syslogd 70526 root 11w VREG 0,9451176 117901 /var/log/messages syslogd 70526 root 12w VREG 0,94 60 117771 /var/log/security syslogd 70526 root 13w VREG 0,9486008 117780 /var/log/auth.log syslogd 70526 root 14w VREG 0,94 2036 117877 /var/log/maillog syslogd 70526 root 15w VREG 0,94 60 117767 /var/log/lpd-errs syslogd 70526 root 16w VREG 0,94 60 117773 /var/log/xferlog syslogd 70526 root 17w VREG 0,9434783 117859 /var/log/cron syslogd 70526 root 18w VREG 0,94 93 117766 /var/log/debug.log syslogd 70526 root 19w VREG 0,94 60 117772 /var/log/slip.log syslogd 70526 root 20w VREG 0,94 60 117770 /var/log/ppp.log 3. fstat comes built-in, omega# fstat -f /var/ USER CMD PID FD MOUNT INUM MODE SZ|DV R/W root syslogd705263 /var 47111 -rw--- 5 w root syslogd70526 11 /var 117901 -rw-r--r-- 51176 w root syslogd70526 12 /var 117771 -rw--- 60 w root syslogd70526 13 /var 117780 -rw--- 86008 w root syslogd70526 14 /var 117877 -rw-r-2036 w root syslogd70526 15 /var 117767 -rw-r--r-- 60 w root syslogd70526 16 /var 117773 -rw--- 60 w root syslogd70526 17 /var 117859 -rw--- 34783 w root syslogd70526 18 /var 117766 -rw--- 93 w root syslogd70526 19 /var 117772 -rw-r- 60 w root syslogd70526 20 /var 117770 -rw-r- 60 w paulacsh 6741 wd /var 117760 drwxr-xr-x4096 r root cron 814 wd /var 23552 drwxr-x--- 512 r root cron 8143 /var 47117 -rw--- 3 w smmspsendmail 808 wd /var 1295366 drwxrwx--- 512 r smmspsendmail 8084 /var 1295368 -rw--- 0 w root sendmail 804 wd /var 1295363 drwxr-xr-x 512 r root sendmail 8045 /var 47115 -rw--- 78 w root devd 4645 /var 47122 -rw--- 3 w I can see nothing here ... 4. But still, disk is full ... or is it? omega# df -h FilesystemSizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/mirror/gm0s1f 18G 18G -1.5G 109%/var Thanks for any further advice, -- fernan --On February 12, 2010 5:39:44 PM -0300 Fernan Aguero fernan.agu...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I have a box (7.2-STABLE, amd64) that is currently showing some disk usage problems. It all started with apache generating huge logs from one of the mod_perl applications
Re: Disk usage analysis
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 07:52:38AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:08:18 -0700, Christopher Chambers ccha...@interchange.ubc.ca wrote: Is there an easy way to analyze disk usage to determine which files and folders are taking up the most space? See man du. Just for terminology: In UNIX (so in FreeBSD), there are no folders. Folders are made of paper and reside in a cabinet. :-) These are called directories. You don't call files sheets of paper either, do you? :-) YES!! I'm probably too up-tight about the use of folder, but it just seems like waay too much stupiding-down of the std Unix terminology. ([I thought I was the only one]. And yes, there are things of greater gravitas to be ticked off about!) gary [ ... ] -- Polytropon From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org The 2.41a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
These are called directories. You don't call files sheets of paper either, do you? :-) YES!! I'm probably too up-tight about the use of folder, but it just seems like waay too much stupiding-down of the std Unix terminology. ([I thought I was the only one]. And yes, there are things of greater gravitas to be ticked off about!) it's just stupid to pursue windoze/maclame naming where names are ALREADY present! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
On 22 apr 2009, at 10:01, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl it's just stupid to pursue windoze/maclame naming It's just stupid to start another flame war about the superiority of one or another OS. Peter ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
On Apr 21, 2009, at 11:24 PM, Robert Huff wrote: Christopher Chambers writes: Is there an easy way to analyze disk usage to determine which files and folders are taking up the most space? If this isn't a FAQ, then search the mailing list archives. This question, or something leading to it like out of disk space, comes up regularly. Robert Huff I used to run durep on my shared servers. The package seems a bit out of date and I have often considered adopting it as a pet project to rewrite/update, but time, time and time always seem to be an issue. You can read more about the application. It generates a comprehensive report that can be automatically emailed, or viewed via the web. http://www.hibernaculum.net/durep/ Cheers, Mikel King CEO, Olivent Technologies Senior Editor, Daemon News Columnist, BSD Magazine 6 Alpine Court Medford, NY 11763 http://www.olivent.com http://www.daemonnews.org http://www.bsdmag.org skype: mikel.king +--+ Follow me if you dare... http://twitter.com/mikelking +--+ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 08:08:18PM -0700, Christopher Chambers wrote: Is there an easy way to analyze disk usage to determine which files and folders are taking up the most space? Check out the du(1) command. Go in to a file system and type du -sk * or maybe du -sh * (I prefer the former because then all numbers have the same value) Once you determine some directory that seems out of line, go in to that directory and do it again. jerry -- Christopher Chambers ccha...@interchange.ubc.ca ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
On Apr 22, 2009, at 3:05 PM, andrew clarke wrote: On Wed 2009-04-22 10:46:14 UTC-0400, Mikel King (mikel.k...@olivent.com ) wrote: I used to run durep on my shared servers. durep seems to have no concept of security :-) So how did you go about restricting unwanted people from viewing its output? Regards Andrew When we ran it initially we used .htaccess, then rolled it into a php app. m ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
On Apr 22, 2009, at 3:13 PM, andrew clarke wrote: On Thu 2009-04-23 05:05:25 UTC+1000, andrew clarke (m...@ozzmosis.com) wrote: durep seems to have no concept of security :-) So how did you go about restricting unwanted people from viewing its output? I'm referring to the CGI version of durep here, of course. We didn't run the CGI version. Only used it as a scheduled task, to generate the report once or twice per day. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
On Thu 2009-04-23 05:05:25 UTC+1000, andrew clarke (m...@ozzmosis.com) wrote: durep seems to have no concept of security :-) So how did you go about restricting unwanted people from viewing its output? I'm referring to the CGI version of durep here, of course. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
On Wed 2009-04-22 10:46:14 UTC-0400, Mikel King (mikel.k...@olivent.com) wrote: I used to run durep on my shared servers. durep seems to have no concept of security :-) So how did you go about restricting unwanted people from viewing its output? Regards Andrew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Disk usage analysis
Is there an easy way to analyze disk usage to determine which files and folders are taking up the most space? -- Christopher Chambers ccha...@interchange.ubc.ca ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Disk usage analysis
Christopher Chambers writes: Is there an easy way to analyze disk usage to determine which files and folders are taking up the most space? If this isn't a FAQ, then search the mailing list archives. This question, or something leading to it like out of disk space, comes up regularly. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
Christopher Chambers wrote: Is there an easy way to analyze disk usage to determine which files and folders are taking up the most space? du -hd 1 | sort -n http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=duapropos=0sektion=0manpath=FreeBSD+7.1-RELEASE+and+Portsformat=html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.comwrote:
Christopher Chambers wrote:
Is there an easy way to analyze disk usage to determine which files and
folders are taking up the most space?
du -hd 1 | sort -n
du -kd 1 | sort -rn
Shows in ENV{BLOCKSIZE} the biggest directories first. Bound to be / always
in this situation. :D
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Disk usage analysis
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:08:18 -0700, Christopher Chambers ccha...@interchange.ubc.ca wrote: Is there an easy way to analyze disk usage to determine which files and folders are taking up the most space? See man du. Just for terminology: In UNIX (so in FreeBSD), there are no folders. Folders are made of paper and reside in a cabinet. :-) These are called directories. You don't call files sheets of paper either, do you? :-) For a GUI solution, check out file browsers. Most of them have the ability to calculate the disk space occupation of a certain directory or subtree. For example, in the Midnight Commander, use PF9, Command, Show directory sizes. -- Polytropon From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disk usage statistics
Wojciech Puchar wrote: Could you suggest me how can I get my disk usage statistics in terms of percentage of the possible disk activity (like in gstat) or megabytes per second (like in iostat), please? systat then type :vmstat I need something not interactive, command that prints what it knows and quits. I want to use it's output in a script. Michal. -- But all endings are also beginnings. We just don't know it at the time. -Mitch Albom ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
disk usage statistics
Hello. Could you suggest me how can I get my disk usage statistics in terms of percentage of the possible disk activity (like in gstat) or megabytes per second (like in iostat), please? I need something that gives actual usage statistics, not any averages. And something that prints what I want and quits (not like gstat in default mode). It have to be available for unprivileged user and I don't want to use any temporally files in the process. The closest I can get is (last column of): iostat -c 2 -d ad0 | tail -n 1 Problem is that it takes two seconds, which is not acceptable for me because I want it's output to be printed in status bar beside date and time. I'm using wmii window manager. Any suggestions and hints are very welcome. Michal -- Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake. -Napoleon Bonaparte ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disk usage statistics
Hello. Could you suggest me how can I get my disk usage statistics in terms of percentage of the possible disk activity (like in gstat) or megabytes per second (like in iostat), please? systat then type :vmstat ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disk usage statistics
Michal m...@infosec.pl wrote: Could you suggest me how can I get my disk usage statistics in terms of percentage of the possible disk activity (like in gstat) or megabytes per second (like in iostat), please? I need something that gives actual usage statistics, not any averages. And something that prints what I want and quits (not like gstat in default mode). It have to be available for unprivileged user and I don't want to use any temporally files in the process. The closest I can get is (last column of): iostat -c 2 -d ad0 | tail -n 1 Problem is that it takes two seconds, which is not acceptable for me because I want it's output to be printed in status bar beside date and time. I'm using wmii window manager. Any suggestions and hints are very welcome. snmp? There's a command line client for net-snmp, and there are a variety of disk activity MIBs. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: differences of disk usage between du and quota binaries
On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 20:12:56 + RW rwmailli...@googlemail.com wrote: On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 20:13:17 +0100 Nicolas Letellier nico...@nicoelro.net wrote: Hello. I use FreeBSD 6.3. I set quota to my fs. But, when I print disk usage with du -sh, I have: .. Why this difference? (633M against 648264) Try dividing 648264 by 1024. Ok. Thanks a lot for your response. Regards. -- -Nicolas. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
differences of disk usage between du and quota binaries
Hello. I use FreeBSD 6.3. I set quota to my fs. But, when I print disk usage with du -sh, I have: r...@domain sites $ du -sh folder 633Mfolder But, when I print disk usage with quota -u user, I have: isk quotas for user user (uid 2002): Filesystem usage quota limit grace files quota limit grace /var 648264 70 702963 0 0 Why this difference? (633M against 648264) Regards, -- -Nicolas. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: differences of disk usage between du and quota binaries
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Nicolas Letellier nico...@nicoelro.net wrote: Hello. I use FreeBSD 6.3. I set quota to my fs. But, when I print disk usage with du -sh, I have: r...@domain sites $ du -sh folder 633Mfolder But, when I print disk usage with quota -u user, I have: isk quotas for user user (uid 2002): Filesystem usage quota limit grace files quota limit grace /var 648264 70 702963 0 0 Why this difference? (633M against 648264) Because 633Mb is 648264 (roughly) bytes. (648264 / 1024) Regards, -- Glen Barber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: differences of disk usage between du and quota binaries
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Glen Barber glen.j.bar...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Nicolas Letellier nico...@nicoelro.net wrote: Hello. I use FreeBSD 6.3. I set quota to my fs. But, when I print disk usage with du -sh, I have: r...@domain sites $ du -sh folder 633Mfolder But, when I print disk usage with quota -u user, I have: isk quotas for user user (uid 2002): Filesystem usage quota limit grace files quota limit grace /var 648264 70 702963 0 0 Why this difference? (633M against 648264) Because 633Mb is 648264 (roughly) bytes. (648264 / 1024) Regards, Well, I never really answered the 'why' part of your question -- the '-h' flag prints 'human readable' output -- ie, in MB instead of bytes. -- Glen Barber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: differences of disk usage between du and quota binaries
On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 20:13:17 +0100 Nicolas Letellier nico...@nicoelro.net wrote: Hello. I use FreeBSD 6.3. I set quota to my fs. But, when I print disk usage with du -sh, I have: .. Why this difference? (633M against 648264) Try dividing 648264 by 1024. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
On Friday 31 October 2008 02:20:39 Brendan Hart wrote: Is it possible that nfs directory got written to /usr at some point in time? You would only notice this with du if the nfs directory is unmounted. Unmount it and ls -al /usr/mountpoint should only give you an empty dir Bingo!! That is exactly the problem. An NFS mount was hiding a 17G local dir which had an old copy of the entire NFS mounted dir. I guess it must have been written incorrectly to this standby server by RSYNC before the NFS mount was put in place. I will add an exclusion to rsync to make sure it does not happen again even if the NFS dir is not mounted. I used to nfs mount /usr/ports and run a cron job on the local machine. I made a file on the local machine: echo 'This is a mountpoint' /usr/ports/KEEP_ME_EMPTY The script would: if [ -e /usr/ports/KEEP_ME_EMPTY ]; then do_nfs_mount(); if [ -e /usr/ports/KEEP_ME_EMPTY ]; then give_up_or_wait(); fi fi Of course it's fragile, but it works for not so critical issues. -- Mel Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules and never get to the software part. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
On Thursday 30 October 2008 01:42:32 Brendan Hart wrote: Hi, I have inherited some servers running various releases of FreeBSD and I am having some trouble with the /usr partition on one of these boxen. The problem is that there appears to be far more space used on the USR partition than there are actual files on the partition. The utility df -h reports 25GB used (i.e. nearly the whole partition), but du -x /usr reports only 7.6GB of files. I have reviewed the FAQ, particularly item 9.24 The du and df commands show different amounts of disk space available. What is going on?. However, the suggested cause of the discrepancy (large files already unlinked but still held open by active processes), does not appear to be true in this case as problem is present even after rebooting into single user mode. #: uname -a FreeBSD ibisweb4spare.strategicecommerce.com.au 6.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE #0: Sun May 7 04:42:56 UTC 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 #: df -h Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/aacd0s1a 496M163M 293M36%/ devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100% /dev /dev/aacd0s1e 496M15M 441M3% /tmp /dev/aacd0s1f28G25G 1.2G96%/usr /dev/aacd0s1d 1.9G429M 1.3G24%/var Is this output untruncated? Is df really df or an alias to 'df -t nonfs'? #: du -x -h /usr 2.0K/usr/.snap 24M/usr/bin snip 584M/usr/ports 140K/usr/lost+found 7.6G/usr Is it possible that nfs directory got written to /usr at some point in time? You would only notice this with du if the nfs directory is unmounted. Unmount it and ls -al /usr/mountpoint should only give you an empty dir. -- Mel Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules and never get to the software part. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
I took a look at using the smart tools as you suggested, but have now found that the disk in question is a RAID1 set on a DELL PERC 3/Di controller and smartctl does not appear to be the correct tool to access the SMART data for the individual disks. After a little research, I have found the aaccli tool and used it to get the following information: Sadly, that controller does not show you SMART attributes. This is one of the biggest problems with the majority (but not all) of hardware RAID controllers -- they give you no access to disk-level things like SMART. FreeBSD has support for such (using CAM's pass(4)), but the driver has to support/use it, *and* the card firmware has to support it. At present, Areca, 3Ware, and Promise controllers support such; HighPoint might, but I haven't confirmed it. Adaptec does not. What you showed tells me nothing about SMART, other than the remote possibility its basing some of its decisions on the general SMART health status, which means jack squat. I can explain why this is if need be, but it's not related to the problem you're having. Thanks for this additional information. I hadn't understood that there was far more information behind the simple SMART ok/not ok reported by the PERC controller. Either way, this is just one of many reasons to avoid hardware RAID controllers if given the choice. I have seen some mentions of using gvinum and/or gmirror to achieve the goals of protection from Single Point Of Failure with a single disk, which I believe is the reason that most people, myself included, have specified Hardware RAID in their servers. Is this what you mean by avoiding Hardware Raid? I hope these are SCSI disks you're showing here, otherwise I'm not sure how the controller is able to get the primary defect count of a SATA or SAS disk. So, assuming the numbers shown are accurate, then yes, I don't think there's any disk-level problem. Yes, they are SCSI disks. Not particularly relevant to this topic, but interesting: I would have thought that SAS would make the same information available as SCSI does, as it is a serial bus evolution of SCSI. Is this thinking incorrect? I understand at this point you're running around with your arms in the air, but you've already confirmed one thing: none of your other systems exhibit this problem. If this is a production environment, step back a moment and ask yourself: just how much time is this worth? It might be better to just newfs the filesystem and be done with it, especially if this is a one-time-never-seen-before thing. I will wait and see if any other list member has any suggestions for me to try, but I am now leaning toward scrubbing the system. Oh well. When you say scrubbing, are you referring to actually formatting/wiping the system, or are you referring to disk scrubbing? I meant reformatting and reinstalling, as a way to escape the issue without spending too much more time on it. I would of course like to understand the problem so as to know what to avoid in the future, but as you make the point above, time is money and it is rapidly approaching the point where it isn't worth any more effort. Thanks for all your help. Best Regards, Brendan Hart __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3571 (20081030) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 11:15:15AM +1030, Brendan Hart wrote: What you showed tells me nothing about SMART, other than the remote possibility its basing some of its decisions on the general SMART health status, which means jack squat. I can explain why this is if need be, but it's not related to the problem you're having. Thanks for this additional information. I hadn't understood that there was far more information behind the simple SMART ok/not ok reported by the PERC controller. Here's an example of some attributes: ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 200 200 051Pre-fail Always - 0 3 Spin_Up_Time0x0003 178 175 021Pre-fail Always - 6066 4 Start_Stop_Count0x0032 100 100 000Old_age Always - 50 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 200 200 140Pre-fail Always - 0 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000e 200 200 051Old_age Always - 0 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 085 085 000Old_age Always - 11429 10 Spin_Retry_Count0x0012 100 253 051Old_age Always - 0 11 Calibration_Retry_Count 0x0012 100 253 051Old_age Always - 0 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age Always - 48 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032 200 200 000Old_age Always - 33 193 Load_Cycle_Count0x0032 200 200 000Old_age Always - 50 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 117 100 000Old_age Always - 33 196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032 200 200 000Old_age Always - 0 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 200 200 000Old_age Always - 0 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0010 200 200 000Old_age Offline - 0 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count0x003e 200 200 000Old_age Always - 0 200 Multi_Zone_Error_Rate 0x0008 200 200 051Old_age Offline - 0 You probably now understand why having access to this information is useful. :-) It's very disappointing that so many RAID controllers don't provide a way to get at this information; the ones which do I am very thankful for! Either way, this is just one of many reasons to avoid hardware RAID controllers if given the choice. I have seen some mentions of using gvinum and/or gmirror to achieve the goals of protection from Single Point Of Failure with a single disk, which I believe is the reason that most people, myself included, have specified Hardware RAID in their servers. Is this what you mean by avoiding Hardware Raid? More or less. Hardware RAID has some advantages (I can dig up a mail of mine long ago outlining what the advantages were), but a lot of the time the controller acts as more of a hindrance than a benefit. I personally feel the negatives outweigh the positives, but each person has different needs and requirements. There are some controllers which work very well and provide great degrees of insights (at a disk level) under FreeBSD, and those are often what I recommend if someone wants to go that route. I make it sound like I'm the authoritative voice for what a person should or should not buy -- I'm not. I predominantly rely on Intel ICHx on-board controllers with SATA disks, because ICHx works quite well under FreeBSD (especially with AHCI). I personally have no experience with gmirror or gvinum, but I do have experience with ZFS. (I'll have a little more experience with gmirror once I have the time to test some reported problems with gmirror and high interrupt counts when a disk is hot-swapped). I hope these are SCSI disks you're showing here, otherwise I'm not sure how the controller is able to get the primary defect count of a SATA or SAS disk. So, assuming the numbers shown are accurate, then yes, I don't think there's any disk-level problem. Yes, they are SCSI disks. Not particularly relevant to this topic, but interesting: I would have thought that SAS would make the same information available as SCSI does, as it is a serial bus evolution of SCSI. Is this thinking incorrect? I don't have any experience with SAS, so I can't comment on what features are available on SAS. Specifically with regards to SMART: historically, SCSI does not provide the amount of granularity/detail with attributes as ATA/SATA does. I do not consider this a negative against SCSI (in case, I very much like SCSI). SAS might provide these details, but I don't know, as I don't have any SAS disks. -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making
RE: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
#: df -h Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/aacd0s1a 496M163M 293M36%/ devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100% /dev /dev/aacd0s1e 496M15M 441M3% /tmp /dev/aacd0s1f28G25G 1.2G96%/usr /dev/aacd0s1d 1.9G429M 1.3G24%/var Is this output untruncated? Is df really df or an alias to 'df -t nonfs'? Yes, it really is the untruncated output of df -h. I also tried the df -t nonfs and it gives exactly the same output as df. What are you expecting that is not present in the output ? Is it possible that nfs directory got written to /usr at some point in time? You would only notice this with du if the nfs directory is unmounted. Unmount it and ls -al /usr/mountpoint should only give you an empty dir Bingo!! That is exactly the problem. An NFS mount was hiding a 17G local dir which had an old copy of the entire NFS mounted dir. I guess it must have been written incorrectly to this standby server by RSYNC before the NFS mount was put in place. I will add an exclusion to rsync to make sure it does not happen again even if the NFS dir is not mounted. Thank you for your help, you have saved me much time rebuilding this server. Best Regards, Brendan Hart - Brendan Hart, Development Manager Strategic Ecommerce Division Securepay Pty Ltd Phone: 08-8274-4000 Fax: 08-8274-1400 __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3571 (20081030) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 11:50:39AM +1030, Brendan Hart wrote: #: df -h Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/aacd0s1a 496M163M 293M36%/ devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100% /dev /dev/aacd0s1e 496M15M 441M3% /tmp /dev/aacd0s1f28G25G 1.2G96%/usr /dev/aacd0s1d 1.9G429M 1.3G24%/var Is this output untruncated? Is df really df or an alias to 'df -t nonfs'? Yes, it really is the untruncated output of df -h. I also tried the df -t nonfs and it gives exactly the same output as df. What are you expecting that is not present in the output ? Is it possible that nfs directory got written to /usr at some point in time? You would only notice this with du if the nfs directory is unmounted. Unmount it and ls -al /usr/mountpoint should only give you an empty dir Bingo!! That is exactly the problem. An NFS mount was hiding a 17G local dir which had an old copy of the entire NFS mounted dir. I guess it must have been written incorrectly to this standby server by RSYNC before the NFS mount was put in place. I will add an exclusion to rsync to make sure it does not happen again even if the NFS dir is not mounted. Thank you for your help, you have saved me much time rebuilding this server. Can either of you outline what exactly happened here? I'm trying to figure out how an NFS mount was hiding a 17G local dir, when there's no NFS mounts shown in the above df output. This is purely an ignorant question on my part, but I'm not able to piece together what happened. -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
Jeremy Chadwick wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 11:50:39AM +1030, Brendan Hart wrote: #: df -h Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/aacd0s1a 496M163M 293M36%/ devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100% /dev /dev/aacd0s1e 496M15M 441M3% /tmp /dev/aacd0s1f28G25G 1.2G96%/usr /dev/aacd0s1d 1.9G429M 1.3G24%/var Is this output untruncated? Is df really df or an alias to 'df -t nonfs'? Yes, it really is the untruncated output of df -h. I also tried the df -t nonfs and it gives exactly the same output as df. What are you expecting that is not present in the output ? I would have to assume he's looking for an NFS mount ;-) Is it possible that nfs directory got written to /usr at some point in time? You would only notice this with du if the nfs directory is unmounted. Unmount it and ls -al /usr/mountpoint should only give you an empty dir Bingo!! That is exactly the problem. An NFS mount was hiding a 17G local dir which had an old copy of the entire NFS mounted dir. I guess it must have been written incorrectly to this standby server by RSYNC before the NFS mount was put in place. I will add an exclusion to rsync to make sure it does not happen again even if the NFS dir is not mounted. Thank you for your help, you have saved me much time rebuilding this server. Can either of you outline what exactly happened here? I'm trying to figure out how an NFS mount was hiding a 17G local dir, when there's no NFS mounts shown in the above df output. This is purely an ignorant question on my part, but I'm not able to piece together what happened. Well, it would appear that perhaps Mel also guessed right about df being aliased? Just my guess, but, as you mention, no nfs mounts appear. I may be mistaken, but I think it's also possible to get into this sort of situation by mounting a local partition on a non-empty mountpoint---at least, it happened to me recently. Kevin Kinsey -- A triangle which has an angle of 135 degrees is called an obscene triangle. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
Now that you mention it, it *is* strange that the NFS mount was not listed by the df function. Try again after a fresh reboot: #: df -h Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/aacd0s1a 496M176M280M39%/ devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100%/dev /dev/aacd0s1e 496M 15M441M 3%/tmp /dev/aacd0s1f 28G4.8G 21G19%/usr /dev/aacd0s1d 1.9G430M1.3G24%/var server2:/storage/blah/foo/data/397G103G262G28% /usr/home/development/mount/foobar I guess I must have missed the final line when copying the output when I first posted to the mailing list. And then when I replied Mel, I had already nmounted the NFS dir when attempting the suggested fix, so it did not show when I ran df again to double-check, and I did not realize what had happened. I apologise for any confusion caused. Best Regards, Brendan Hart - Brendan Hart, Development Manager Strategic Ecommerce Division Securepay Pty Ltd Phone: 08-8274-4000 Fax: 08-8274-1400 -Original Message- From: Jeremy Chadwick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 31 October 2008 12:02 PM To: Brendan Hart Cc: 'Mel'; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 11:50:39AM +1030, Brendan Hart wrote: #: df -h Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/aacd0s1a 496M163M 293M36%/ devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100% /dev /dev/aacd0s1e 496M15M 441M3% /tmp /dev/aacd0s1f28G25G 1.2G96%/usr /dev/aacd0s1d 1.9G429M 1.3G24%/var Is this output untruncated? Is df really df or an alias to 'df -t nonfs'? Yes, it really is the untruncated output of df -h. I also tried the df -t nonfs and it gives exactly the same output as df. What are you expecting that is not present in the output ? Is it possible that nfs directory got written to /usr at some point in time? You would only notice this with du if the nfs directory is unmounted. Unmount it and ls -al /usr/mountpoint should only give you an empty dir Bingo!! That is exactly the problem. An NFS mount was hiding a 17G local dir which had an old copy of the entire NFS mounted dir. I guess it must have been written incorrectly to this standby server by RSYNC before the NFS mount was put in place. I will add an exclusion to rsync to make sure it does not happen again even if the NFS dir is not mounted. Thank you for your help, you have saved me much time rebuilding this server. Can either of you outline what exactly happened here? I'm trying to figure out how an NFS mount was hiding a 17G local dir, when there's no NFS mounts shown in the above df output. This is purely an ignorant question on my part, but I'm not able to piece together what happened. -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3571 (20081030) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3571 (20081030) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
Hi, I have inherited some servers running various releases of FreeBSD and I am having some trouble with the /usr partition on one of these boxen. The problem is that there appears to be far more space used on the USR partition than there are actual files on the partition. The utility df -h reports 25GB used (i.e. nearly the whole partition), but du -x /usr reports only 7.6GB of files. I have reviewed the FAQ, particularly item 9.24 The du and df commands show different amounts of disk space available. What is going on?. However, the suggested cause of the discrepancy (large files already unlinked but still held open by active processes), does not appear to be true in this case as problem is present even after rebooting into single user mode. #: uname -a FreeBSD ibisweb4spare.strategicecommerce.com.au 6.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE #0: Sun May 7 04:42:56 UTC 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 #: df -h Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/aacd0s1a 496M163M 293M36%/ devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100% /dev /dev/aacd0s1e 496M15M 441M3% /tmp /dev/aacd0s1f28G25G 1.2G96%/usr /dev/aacd0s1d 1.9G429M 1.3G24%/var #: du -x -h /usr 2.0K/usr/.snap 24M/usr/bin snip 584M/usr/ports 140K/usr/lost+found 7.6G/usr The server is used as a standby machine and a nightly cronjob which uses RSYNC to make a copy of the /usr partition from a live server. Depending on how recently the logs have been culled, the Live server has approximately 7-10GB of data on the /usr partition, so I would expect the same size of data on the standby server. This may be irrelevant, but the server also has an external data directory with 11GB mounted via NFS as a directory under the USR partition. Next, I began to suspect some sort of disk corruption (echoes of the old days of MSDOS lost cluster chains) and I have attempted to find disk issues by running fsck, but no issues were reported and the issue was not remedied. I also tried running fsck in single user mode, again, no improvement. Can anyone suggest what I can try next? Best Regards, Brendan Hart - Brendan Hart, Development Manager Strategic Ecommerce Division Securepay Pty Ltd Phone: 08-8274-4000 Fax: 08-8274-1400 __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3567 (20081029) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:12:32AM +1030, Brendan Hart wrote: I have inherited some servers running various releases of FreeBSD and I am having some trouble with the /usr partition on one of these boxen. The problem is that there appears to be far more space used on the USR partition than there are actual files on the partition. The utility df -h reports 25GB used (i.e. nearly the whole partition), but du -x /usr reports only 7.6GB of files. Have you tried playing with tunefs(8), -m flag? I can't reproduce this behaviour on any of our systems. icarus# df -k /usr Filesystem 1024-blocksUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad12s1f 167879968 1973344 152476228 1%/usr icarus# du -sx /usr 1973344 /usr eos# df -k /usr Filesystem 1024-blocksUsedAvail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1f32494668 2261670 27633426 8%/usr eos# du -sx /usr 2261670 /usr anubis# df -k /usr Filesystem 1024-blocksUsedAvail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad4s1f80010344 1809620 71799898 2%/usr anubis# du -sx /usr 1809620 /usr horus# df -k /usr Filesystem 1024-blocksUsedAvail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad4s1f32494668 1608458 28286638 5%/usr horus# du -sx /usr 1608458 /usr -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
Hi, The space reserved as minfree does not appear to have been changed from the default setting of 8%. Is your suggestion that I should change it to a larger value? I don't understand how modifying it now could fix the situation, but I could be missing something. The output of tunefs -p /usr is as follows: #: tunefs -p /usr tunefs: ACLs: (-a) disabled tunefs: MAC multilabel: (-l) disabled tunefs: soft updates: (-n) enabled tunefs: maximum blocks per file in a cylinder group: (-e) 2048 tunefs: average file size: (-f)16384 tunefs: average number of files in a directory: (-s) 64 tunefs: minimum percentage of free space: (-m) 8% tunefs: optimization preference: (-o) time tunefs: volume label: (-L) I have not observed the problem on any of the other ~dozen FreeBSD servers in our data centre. Could the missing space be an indication of hardware disk issues i.e. physical blocks marked as bad? Is it possible on UFS2 for disk space to be allocated but hidden somehow? (although I have been running the commands such as du -x as superuser) Similarly, is it possible on UFS2 for disk space to be allocated in lost cluster chains ? Best Regards, Brendan Hart -Original Message- From: Jeremy Chadwick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 30 October 2008 11:50 AM To: Brendan Hart Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:12:32AM +1030, Brendan Hart wrote: I have inherited some servers running various releases of FreeBSD and I am having some trouble with the /usr partition on one of these boxen. The problem is that there appears to be far more space used on the USR partition than there are actual files on the partition. The utility df -h reports 25GB used (i.e. nearly the whole partition), but du -x /usr reports only 7.6GB of files. Have you tried playing with tunefs(8), -m flag? I can't reproduce this behaviour on any of our systems. icarus# df -k /usr Filesystem 1024-blocksUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad12s1f 167879968 1973344 152476228 1%/usr icarus# du -sx /usr 1973344 /usr eos# df -k /usr Filesystem 1024-blocksUsedAvail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1f32494668 2261670 27633426 8%/usr eos# du -sx /usr 2261670 /usr anubis# df -k /usr Filesystem 1024-blocksUsedAvail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad4s1f80010344 1809620 71799898 2%/usr anubis# du -sx /usr 1809620 /usr horus# df -k /usr Filesystem 1024-blocksUsedAvail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad4s1f32494668 1608458 28286638 5%/usr horus# du -sx /usr 1608458 /usr -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3567 (20081029) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3567 (20081029) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:11:58PM +1030, Brendan Hart wrote: The space reserved as minfree does not appear to have been changed from the default setting of 8%. Okay, then that's likely not the problem. Is your suggestion that I should change it to a larger value? That would just make your problem worse. :-) I don't understand how modifying it now could fix the situation, but I could be missing something. Well, the feature I described isn't what's causing your problem, but to clarify: if you change the percentage, it applies immediately. I read I don't understand how modifying it now could fix ... to mean isn't this option applied during newfs? I have not observed the problem on any of the other ~dozen FreeBSD servers in our data centre. Unless someone more clueful chimes in with better hints, the obvious choice here is going to be recreate the filesystem. I'd tell you something like try using ffsinfo(8)?, but I've never used the tool, so very little of the output will make sense to me. Could the missing space be an indication of hardware disk issues i.e. physical blocks marked as bad? The simple answer is no, bad blocks would not cause what you're seeing. smartctl -a /dev/disk will help you determine if there's evidence the disk is in bad shape. I can help you with reading SMART stats if need be. Since you booted single-user and presumably ran fsck -f /usr, and nothing came back, I'm left to believe this isn't filesystem corruption. Is it possible on UFS2 for disk space to be allocated but hidden somehow? (although I have been running the commands such as du -x as superuser) That's exactly what the above tunefs parameter describes. Similarly, is it possible on UFS2 for disk space to be allocated in lost cluster chains ? I don't know what this means. Someone more clueful will have to answer. -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
On Thu 30/10/2008 12:25 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: Could the missing space be an indication of hardware disk issues i.e. physical blocks marked as bad? The simple answer is no, bad blocks would not cause what you're seeing. smartctl -a /dev/disk will help you determine if there's evidence the disk is in bad shape. I can help you with reading SMART stats if need be. I took a look at using the smart tools as you suggested, but have now found that the disk in question is a RAID1 set on a DELL PERC 3/Di controller and smartctl does not appear to be the correct tool to access the SMART data for the individual disks. After a little research, I have found the aaccli tool and used it to get the following information: AAC0 disk show smart Executing: disk show smart SmartMethod of Enable Capable Informational Exception Performance Error B:ID:L Device Exceptions(MRIE) ControlEnabled Count -- --- - --- -- 0:00:0 Y6 Y N 0 0:01:0 Y6 Y N 0 AAC0 disk show defects 00 Executing: disk show defects (ID=0) Number of PRIMARY defects on drive: 285 Number of GROWN defects on drive: 0 AAC0 disk show defects 01 Executing: disk show defects (ID=1) Number of PRIMARY defects on drive: 193 Number of GROWN defects on drive: 0 This output doesn't seem to indicate existing physical issues on the disks. Since you booted single-user and presumably ran fsck -f /usr, and nothing came back, I'm left to believe this isn't filesystem corruption. Yes, this is the command I tried when I went into the data centre yesterday, and yes, nothing came back. I have done some additional digging and noticed that there is a /usr/.snap folder present. ls -al shows no content however. Some quick searching shows this could possibly be part of a UFS snapshot... I wonder if partition snapshots might be the cause of my major disk space loss. Some old message group posts suggest that UFS snapshots were dangerously flakey on Release 6.1, so I would hope that my predecessors were not using them however... Do you know anything about snapshots, and how I could see what/if any/ space is used by snapshots? I also took a look to see if the issue could be something like running out of inodes, But this does't seem to be the case: #: df -ih /usr Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on /dev/aacd0s1f 28G 25G1.1G96% 708181 3107241 19% /usr BTW Jeremy, thanks for your help thus far. I will wait and see if any other list member has any suggestions for me to try, but I am now leaning toward scrubbing the system. Oh well. Best Regards, Brendan Hart - Brendan Hart, Development Manager Strategic Ecommerce Division Securepay Pty Ltd Phone: 08-8274-4000 Fax: 08-8274-1400 __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3568 (20081030) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 02:04:36PM +1030, Brendan Hart wrote: On Thu 30/10/2008 12:25 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: Could the missing space be an indication of hardware disk issues i.e. physical blocks marked as bad? The simple answer is no, bad blocks would not cause what you're seeing. smartctl -a /dev/disk will help you determine if there's evidence the disk is in bad shape. I can help you with reading SMART stats if need be. I took a look at using the smart tools as you suggested, but have now found that the disk in question is a RAID1 set on a DELL PERC 3/Di controller and smartctl does not appear to be the correct tool to access the SMART data for the individual disks. After a little research, I have found the aaccli tool and used it to get the following information: Sadly, that controller does not show you SMART attributes. This is one of the biggest problems with the majority (but not all) of hardware RAID controllers -- they give you no access to disk-level things like SMART. FreeBSD has support for such (using CAM's pass(4)), but the driver has to support/use it, *and* the card firmware has to support it. At present, Areca, 3Ware, and Promise controllers support such; HighPoint might, but I haven't confirmed it. Adaptec does not. What you showed tells me nothing about SMART, other than the remote possibility its basing some of its decisions on the general SMART health status, which means jack squat. I can explain why this is if need be, but it's not related to the problem you're having. Either way, this is just one of many reasons to avoid hardware RAID controllers if given the choice. AAC0 disk show defects 00 Executing: disk show defects (ID=0) Number of PRIMARY defects on drive: 285 Number of GROWN defects on drive: 0 AAC0 disk show defects 01 Executing: disk show defects (ID=1) Number of PRIMARY defects on drive: 193 Number of GROWN defects on drive: 0 This output doesn't seem to indicate existing physical issues on the disks. I hope these are SCSI disks you're showing here, otherwise I'm not sure how the controller is able to get the primary defect count of a SATA or SAS disk. So, assuming the numbers shown are accurate, then yes, I don't think there's any disk-level problem. I have done some additional digging and noticed that there is a /usr/.snap folder present. ls -al shows no content however. Some quick searching shows this could possibly be part of a UFS snapshot... Correct; the .snap directory is used for UFS2 snapshots and mksnap_ffs(8) (which is also the program dump -L uses). I wonder if partition snapshots might be the cause of my major disk space loss. Your /usr/.snap directory is empty; there are no snapshots. That said, are you actually making filesystem snapshots using dump or mksnap_ffs? If not, then you're barking up the wrong tree. :-) I also took a look to see if the issue could be something like running out of inodes, But this does't seem to be the case: #: df -ih /usr Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on /dev/aacd0s1f 28G 25G1.1G96% 708181 3107241 19% /usr inodes != disk space, but I'm pretty sure you know that. I understand at this point you're running around with your arms in the air, but you've already confirmed one thing: none of your other systems exhibit this problem. If this is a production environment, step back a moment and ask yourself: just how much time is this worth? It might be better to just newfs the filesystem and be done with it, especially if this is a one-time-never-seen-before thing. I will wait and see if any other list member has any suggestions for me to try, but I am now leaning toward scrubbing the system. Oh well. When you say scrubbing, are you referring to actually formatting/wiping the system, or are you referring to disk scrubbing? -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SQUID 2.6 disk usage didn't grow HELP
Hi Narek, Narek Gharibyan wrote: I set squid 2.6 transparent proxy with default settings on P4 2000 RAM 512/ 80GB HDD. I change only Which exact 2.6 version of Squid are you using? Which FreeBSD version are you running on your machine? cache_mem 128 MB cache_dir ufs /usr/local/squid/cache 40960 16 256 Squid works normally and do caching. It takes 300Mb RAM, and about 3GB HDD space, but it DOESN'T use more space. Squid works about 15 days without any restart and it use only 3GB space and the cache size didn't grow. Is it normal? I want to use more HDD cache Please advice That's strange. Can you post the full output of squidclient mgr:info and squidclient mgr:storedir ? Thank you in advance Thanking you... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- With best regards and good wishes, Yours sincerely, Tek Bahadur Limbu System Administrator (TAG/TDG Group) Jwl Systems Department Worldlink Communications Pvt. Ltd. Jawalakhel, Nepal http://www.wlink.com.np http://teklimbu.wordpress.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SQUID 2.6 disk usage didn't grow HELP
I set squid 2.6 transparent proxy with default settings on P4 2000 RAM 512/ 80GB HDD. I change only cache_mem 128 MB cache_dir ufs /usr/local/squid/cache 40960 16 256 Squid works normally and do caching. It takes 300Mb RAM, and about 3GB HDD space, but it DOESN'T use more space. Squid works about 15 days without any restart and it use only 3GB space and the cache size didn't grow. Is it normal? I want to use more HDD cache Please advice Thank you in advance ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What is my disk usage?
du is acting strange on my system: # du /usr/X11R6 4 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 8 /usr/X11R6/share 12 /usr/X11R6 # du -h /usr/X11R6 2.0K/usr/X11R6/share/locale 4.0K/usr/X11R6/share 6.0K/usr/X11R6 # du -k /usr/X11R6 2 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 4 /usr/X11R6/share 6 /usr/X11R6 This seems to be happening only after I have sudo'd myself. du reports consistent numbers if I run it as myself or if I su first. This is a FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE system with snapshots enabled. Any ideas? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What is my disk usage?
On Aug 8, 2007, at 11:21 AMAug 8, 2007, Janos Dohanics wrote: du is acting strange on my system: # du /usr/X11R6 4 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 8 /usr/X11R6/share 12 /usr/X11R6 # du -h /usr/X11R6 2.0K/usr/X11R6/share/locale 4.0K/usr/X11R6/share 6.0K/usr/X11R6 # du -k /usr/X11R6 2 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 4 /usr/X11R6/share 6 /usr/X11R6 This seems to be happening only after I have sudo'd myself. du reports consistent numbers if I run it as myself or if I su first. This is a FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE system with snapshots enabled. I don't get it, what's wrong? Things look normal to me... Eric Crist ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What is my disk usage?
On Aug 8, 2007, at 9:21 AM, Janos Dohanics wrote: du is acting strange on my system: # du /usr/X11R6 4 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 8 /usr/X11R6/share 12 /usr/X11R6 # du -h /usr/X11R6 2.0K/usr/X11R6/share/locale 4.0K/usr/X11R6/share 6.0K/usr/X11R6 # du -k /usr/X11R6 2 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 4 /usr/X11R6/share 6 /usr/X11R6 This seems to be happening only after I have sudo'd myself. du reports consistent numbers if I run it as myself or if I su first. This is a FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE system with snapshots enabled. Any ideas? Presumably the accounts which have consistent results have something like: setenv BLOCKSIZE K ...or: export BLOCKSIZE=K ...configured in their shell. -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What is my disk usage?
On 8/8/2007, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 8, 2007, at 9:21 AM, Janos Dohanics wrote: du is acting strange on my system: # du /usr/X11R6 4 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 8 /usr/X11R6/share 12 /usr/X11R6 # du -h /usr/X11R6 2.0K/usr/X11R6/share/locale 4.0K/usr/X11R6/share 6.0K/usr/X11R6 # du -k /usr/X11R6 2 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 4 /usr/X11R6/share 6 /usr/X11R6 This seems to be happening only after I have sudo'd myself. du reports consistent numbers if I run it as myself or if I su first. This is a FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE system with snapshots enabled. Any ideas? Presumably the accounts which have consistent results have something like: setenv BLOCKSIZE K ...or: export BLOCKSIZE=K ...configured in their shell. -- -Chuck Well, this is all I have in .bash_profile: $ cat .bash_profile PS1=[EMAIL PROTECTED] \w]\\$ export EDITOR=vim The issue is that du reports twice as much disk usage as du -h or du -k, and I have no clue why... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What is my disk usage?
On 08/08/2007, Janos Dohanics [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/8/2007, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 8, 2007, at 9:21 AM, Janos Dohanics wrote: du is acting strange on my system: # du /usr/X11R6 4 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 8 /usr/X11R6/share 12 /usr/X11R6 # du -h /usr/X11R6 2.0K/usr/X11R6/share/locale 4.0K/usr/X11R6/share 6.0K/usr/X11R6 # du -k /usr/X11R6 2 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 4 /usr/X11R6/share 6 /usr/X11R6 This seems to be happening only after I have sudo'd myself. du reports consistent numbers if I run it as myself or if I su first. This is a FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE system with snapshots enabled. Any ideas? Presumably the accounts which have consistent results have something like: setenv BLOCKSIZE K ...or: export BLOCKSIZE=K ...configured in their shell. -- -Chuck Well, this is all I have in .bash_profile: $ cat .bash_profile PS1=[EMAIL PROTECTED] \w]\\$ export EDITOR=vim The issue is that du reports twice as much disk usage as du -h or du -k, and I have no clue why... Chuck is right: the twice as much is du reporting in the default 512 byte blocks. You probably have the BLOCKSIZE=K set in either ~/.profile or /etc/profile. If you recently upgraded sudo, you should take note that env_reset is now the default. You can return to the old behaviour by adding a line like: Defaults !env_reset to your sudoers file. It might be more secure to not do this with a Defaults line, though. man 5 sudoers for more information. -- -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What is my disk usage?
On 8/8/2007, Don Hinton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Janos Dohanics writes: On 8/8/2007, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 8, 2007, at 9:21 AM, Janos Dohanics wrote: du is acting strange on my system: # du /usr/X11R6 4 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 8 /usr/X11R6/share 12 /usr/X11R6 # du -h /usr/X11R6 2.0K/usr/X11R6/share/locale 4.0K/usr/X11R6/share 6.0K/usr/X11R6 # du -k /usr/X11R6 2 /usr/X11R6/share/locale 4 /usr/X11R6/share 6 /usr/X11R6 This seems to be happening only after I have sudo'd myself. du reports consistent numbers if I run it as myself or if I su first. This is a FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE system with snapshots enabled. Any ideas? Presumably the accounts which have consistent results have something like: setenv BLOCKSIZE K ...or: export BLOCKSIZE=K ...configured in their shell. -- -Chuck Well, this is all I have in .bash_profile: $ cat .bash_profile PS1=[EMAIL PROTECTED] \w]\\$ export EDITOR=vim The issue is that du reports twice as much disk usage as du -h or du -k, and I have no clue why... $ echo $BLOCKSIZE K $ mkdir test $ du test 2 test $ du -k test 2 test $ du -h test 2,0Ktest $ unset BLOCKSIZE $ du test 4 test BLOCKSIZE If the environment variable BLOCKSIZE is set, and the -k option is not specified, the block counts will be displayed in units of that size block. If BLOCKSIZE is not set, and the -k option is not specified, the block counts will be displayed in 512-byte blocks. hth... don Thank you... sorry for the noise. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mystery of increasing disk usage
I'm having big problems trying to pin down the cause of spiralling disk usage on a partition. du -sh shows that /usr is using 5.9 GB: $ du -shL /usr 5.9G/usr However, df shows: Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad4s1f 47G 43G131M 100%/usr [...] It seems to be eating 3 MB roughly every 4-5 minutes. However, repeated uses of du don't show any increased usage. It only appears in df. defiant:/usr$ du -cksmxL * | sort -rn 6042total 3015home 965 obj 777 local 770 jail 376 share 36 lib 32 X11R6 28 bin 19 libexec 15 sbin 15 include 1 tmp 1 ports 1 openssl 1 libdata 1 games 1 compat My first thought is that the du binary is compromised, but I thought that I may be missing something blindingly obvious. Thanks, -- -Jamie L. Penman-Smithson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mystery of increasing disk usage
Jamie Penman-Smithson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm having big problems trying to pin down the cause of spiralling disk usage on a partition. du -sh shows that /usr is using 5.9 GB: $ du -shL /usr 5.9G/usr However, df shows: Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad4s1f 47G 43G131M 100%/usr [...] It seems to be eating 3 MB roughly every 4-5 minutes. However, repeated uses of du don't show any increased usage. It only appears in df. defiant:/usr$ du -cksmxL * | sort -rn 6042total 3015home 965 obj 777 local 770 jail 376 share 36 lib 32 X11R6 28 bin 19 libexec 15 sbin 15 include 1 tmp 1 ports 1 openssl 1 libdata 1 games 1 compat My first thought is that the du binary is compromised, but I thought that I may be missing something blindingly obvious. If I remember correctly, the most common reason for this is files that have been deleted, but have not had all references to them closed (i.e. file descriptors). For example, program creates a temporary file, then deletes it but does not _close_ it. This means the filesystem can't free up the used blocks yet. There's no directory entry, so du doesn't see the usage. One way to tell would be to reboot the system. If it comes up with du and df agreeing, then this problem is occurring somewhere. The trickier step may be to figure out what program is causing it. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mystery of increasing disk usage
Bill Moran wrote: If I remember correctly, the most common reason for this is files that have been deleted, but have not had all references to them closed (i.e. file descriptors). You remember correctly: I've seen this happening with Apache logfiles that had been deleted but Apache didn't know about that... Peter -- http://www.boosten.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mystery of increasing disk usage
Peter Boosten wrote: Bill Moran wrote: If I remember correctly, the most common reason for this is files that have been deleted, but have not had all references to them closed (i.e. file descriptors). You remember correctly: I've seen this happening with Apache logfiles that had been deleted but Apache didn't know about that... A solution might be searching with fstat or lsof... Peter -- http://www.boosten.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hard disk usage monitoring
I am looking for a tool to allow a windows XP client to monitor the disk usage (basically the % used over time, how much space is left, etc) on a FreeBSD file server. I will have samba and webmin installed already. I've looked at some webmin modules but they seem very archaic. PM ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: hard disk usage monitoring
Peter wrote: I am looking for a tool to allow a windows XP client to monitor the disk usage (basically the % used over time, how much space is left, etc) on a FreeBSD file server. I will have samba and webmin installed already. I've looked at some webmin modules but they seem very archaic. PM ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You might consider something like MRTG, or some other software that would run on the windows machine to interact with SNMP on the FreeBSD box. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: hard disk usage monitoring
You can use bigsister and monitor the remote and local diskusage. -Derek At 01:22 PM 2/15/2007, Peter wrote: I am looking for a tool to allow a windows XP client to monitor the disk usage (basically the % used over time, how much space is left, etc) on a FreeBSD file server. I will have samba and webmin installed already. I've looked at some webmin modules but they seem very archaic. PM ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/usr/disk usage
Hi all, Recently installed 6.0 on a new server. Never had a problem with a /usr FS at 2.0 Gig before, but this one seems to be filling up fast. make clean already done on ports, what else am I missing here? DOnt really want to delete source, but what else can be removed? s1# du -h -d1 2.0K./.snap 24M./bin 13M./include 31M./lib 92K./libdata 15M./libexec 248M./local 13M./sbin 183M./share 411M./src 335M./ports 126M./compat 2.0K./games 2.0K./obj 23M./X11R6 1.4G. s1# Thanks all, -GRant ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: /usr/disk usage
On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 11:41:00AM -0500, Grant Peel wrote: Hi all, Recently installed 6.0 on a new server. Never had a problem with a /usr FS at 2.0 Gig before, but this one seems to be filling up fast. make clean already done on ports, what else am I missing here? DOnt really want to delete source, but what else can be removed? s1# du -h -d1 2.0K./.snap 24M./bin 13M./include 31M./lib 92K./libdata 15M./libexec 248M./local 13M./sbin 183M./share 411M./src 335M./ports 126M./compat 2.0K./games 2.0K./obj 23M./X11R6 1.4G. That all seems about normal to me. All you can do is * Add more space * Install fewer ports * Delete src or ports Kris pgpRXrJ7U2atn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: /usr/disk usage
On 12/8/05, Grant Peel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Recently installed 6.0 on a new server. Never had a problem with a /usr FS at 2.0 Gig before, but this one seems to be filling up fast. make clean already done on ports, what else am I missing here? DOnt really want to delete source, but what else can be removed? : 335M./ports You can delete files under /usr/ports/distfiles/ If you need to recompile a port sometime it will be downloaded again. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gathering statistics on disk usage
I am trying to set up mrtg to graph disk usage. I've tried using the output of iostat to provide me with usage in MB/s. The problem with this is that moving data from disk to disk on the system causes the usage to jump to around 30MB/s. Even with mrtg configured to draw the graphs logarithmically they basically blow up and the normal transfers are not really visable. systat -vm gives statistics on disk usage with a percent busy field. This stat would be easier to graph and I would like to use it. My problem is that I can't seem to extract the output of systat properly. I've tried doing systat -vm | tail -n -1 and that doesn't work. I've also tried systat -vm somefile.txt and that doesn't work. There doesn't seem to be a way to get systat to run once and then quit either. Can anyone think of a way to either capture systat's output or recommend a utility that will give me a % busy output? I've tried iostat without success. -- Thanks, Josh Paetzel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Gathering statistics on disk usage
In the last episode (Oct 15), Josh Paetzel said: I am trying to set up mrtg to graph disk usage. I've tried using the output of iostat to provide me with usage in MB/s. The problem with this is that moving data from disk to disk on the system causes the usage to jump to around 30MB/s. Even with mrtg configured to draw the graphs logarithmically they basically blow up and the normal transfers are not really visable. systat -vm gives statistics on disk usage with a percent busy field. This stat would be easier to graph and I would like to use it. My problem is that I can't seem to extract the output of systat properly. I've tried doing systat -vm | tail -n -1 and that doesn't work. I've also tried systat -vm somefile.txt and that doesn't work. There doesn't seem to be a way to get systat to run once and then quit either. Can anyone think of a way to either capture systat's output or recommend a utility that will give me a % busy output? I've tried iostat without success. If you apply the patch at http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/68840, you will be able to get %busy stats out of iostat. You can also try installing net-snmp and polling the diskIOLA5 value for the disk, but on my system at least, the values don't seem to make sense (I have seen numbers from -2546 to 3000). -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Gathering statistics on disk usage
If you apply the patch at http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/68840, you will be able to get %busy stats out of iostat. Thanks for your quick reply. Unfortunately your patch does not apply cleanly to a 4.11-STABLE box. I can supply iostat.c.rej if you want it. I also tried it on a 5.4-RELENG-p7 box and it failed there as well. -- Thanks, Josh Paetzel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Gathering statistics on disk usage
In the last episode (Oct 15), Josh Paetzel said: If you apply the patch at http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/68840, you will be able to get %busy stats out of iostat. Thanks for your quick reply. Unfortunately your patch does not apply cleanly to a 4.11-STABLE box. I can supply iostat.c.rej if you want it. I also tried it on a 5.4-RELENG-p7 box and it failed there as well. It definitely should have applied cleanly on 5.4. I just tested it. Try downloading the Raw PR link at the bottom of the page; that will remove any html-escaping. The patch won't work on 4.x because the devstat interface got overhauled between 4.x and 5.x. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Gathering statistics on disk usage
It definitely should have applied cleanly on 5.4. I just tested it. Try downloading the Raw PR link at the bottom of the page; that will remove any html-escaping. The patch won't work on 4.x because the devstat interface got overhauled between 4.x and 5.x. All right, I get the point hat for this one. You're right, it works fine on 5.4 for me now. -- Thanks, Josh Paetzel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Monitor Disk Usage (Unusual Load Avgs)
Hi, Server specs Dual p4 xeon 2.4 (4virtual cpus) 1gig ecc ram 5x 36gig 10k rpm scsi on a ami megaraid I only host a few web sites on this server which at the most peak hour of times there is only about 6-7%cpu usage. For some reason my load avg's will jump from 0.05 to 0.98 even to 1.50 when the cpu is only using 3%. I am thinking something is using the hard drive as I have load avg peaks of 6.0-7.0. I want to find out what is causing this as im curious to why they get so high. Does anyone know how to find out what running processes are using the harddrive or something like that?? Also how do I check if DMA mode is enabled, I know there is a hdparm in linux but I cant find anything like that for freebsd.. Thanks for you help Steve ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Monitor Disk Usage (Unusual Load Avgs)
Steven Adams wrote: Hi, Server specs Dual p4 xeon 2.4 (4virtual cpus) 1gig ecc ram 5x 36gig 10k rpm scsi on a ami megaraid I only host a few web sites on this server which at the most peak hour of times there is only about 6-7%cpu usage. For some reason my load avg's will jump from 0.05 to 0.98 even to 1.50 when the cpu is only using 3%. I am thinking something is using the hard drive as I have load avg peaks of 6.0-7.0. I want to find out what is causing this as im curious to why they get so high. Does anyone know how to find out what running processes are using the harddrive or something like that?? Also how do I check if DMA mode is enabled, I know there is a hdparm in linux but I cant find anything like that for freebsd.. Thanks for you help Steve As for that last, I'm sure there are probably several ways, but I'm a simpleton. Why not: % dmesg | grep DMA atapci0: SiS 962/963 UDMA133 controller port 0x4000-0x400f,0x374-0x377, 0x170-0x177,0x3f4-0x3f7,0x1f0-0x1f7 at device 2.5 on pci0 ad0: 38166MB ST340014A [77545/16/63] at ata0-master UDMA100 Hrmm, I need to see if my disk'll go faster ... ;-) Kevin Kinsey PS Incidentally, what's up with this? % finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [freebsd.org] finger: drift: no such user I'm leaving that address in, just in case something's not quite right with finger(1)*, but whassup if it's *correct*?? (*which is entirely possible, I suppose) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Monitor Disk Usage (Unusual Load Avgs)
Steve, There's the obligatory 'ps -ax' to see what's running. You can also run 'top' to get a constantly updated display of processes. Some other stuff you may want to look around with is 'systat' . Just running the command doesn't show a whole lot but with various options and such you can pull some useful info, check the man page. Something else is 'lsof' which lists open files and such, can help you get an idea of what's open and running. You can also run 'man -k stat' and find lots of other goodies. To find out what DMA mode is running, check your dmesg. 'dmesg | grep DMA' While I can't provide a specific answer to your questions I've pointed out some things that may help you find what you're looking for. Let us know what you find. --chip On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 23:00:19 +1000, Steven Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Server specs Dual p4 xeon 2.4 (4virtual cpus) 1gig ecc ram 5x 36gig 10k rpm scsi on a ami megaraid I only host a few web sites on this server which at the most peak hour of times there is only about 6-7%cpu usage. For some reason my load avg's will jump from 0.05 to 0.98 even to 1.50 when the cpu is only using 3%. I am thinking something is using the hard drive as I have load avg peaks of 6.0-7.0. I want to find out what is causing this as im curious to why they get so high. Does anyone know how to find out what running processes are using the harddrive or something like that?? Also how do I check if DMA mode is enabled, I know there is a hdparm in linux but I cant find anything like that for freebsd.. Thanks for you help Steve ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Checking Partition/User disk usage?
On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 08:18:32PM -0700, Charlie La Mothe wrote: This is a pretty simple question, I'm just looking for tools that report back disk or user disk usage. I remember these commands, but I can't remember what they are called df(1) du(1) repquota(1) Obviously you'll need to have set up quotas before that last command will do anything. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK pgprg4FZiVtQE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Checking Partition/User disk usage?
This is a pretty simple question, I'm just looking for tools that report back disk or user disk usage. I remember these commands, but I can't remember what they are called Thanks, charlie ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disk Usage
On Wed, 5 May 2004 10:38 am, Lowell Gilbert wrote: Michael Conlen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Any ideas what would cause the df -k and du -k discrepancy? FAQ entry: The du and df commands show different amounts of disk space available. What is going on? http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/disks.html#DU- VS-DF ___ Ahh the all encompasing Freebsd documentation. Im sure the meaning of life is hidden in there somewhere... ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disk Usage
I have a NFS server running FreeBSD-4.9-RELEASE. It's run fine for several months with five FreeBSD 4.9 systems mounting it's filesystems. Suddenly something started using disk space at the rate of 10 GB/hour on one of the filesystems (which has exported directories). The catch is that a du -k shows a total usage for that file system of much less than df -k. du -k essentially shows the disk usage before the available space started to disappear! Normally I'd presume someone's hiding files under a mount point when I see this but nothings mounted on a directory in this filesystem. Upon reboot the space is not used anymore, df -k and du -k report similar values. Quite simply odd. Some other details... ...this has happened twice in one day, and the rate of ghost disk usage is constant and identical in both graphs. The file server is used to serve files to clustered web servers. There's considerable write activity to the NFS server all the time (40-60Mbit/sec) and moderate read access (~10Mbit/sec). Any ideas what would cause the df -k and du -k discrepancy? -- Michael Conlen ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disk Usage
On Tuesday 04 May 2004 05:49 pm, Michael Conlen wrote: Any ideas what would cause the df -k and du -k discrepancy? maybe fu-k ? :) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disk Usage
On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 06:49:38PM -0400, Michael Conlen wrote: I have a NFS server running FreeBSD-4.9-RELEASE. It's run fine for several months with five FreeBSD 4.9 systems mounting it's filesystems. Suddenly something started using disk space at the rate of 10 GB/hour on one of the filesystems (which has exported directories). The catch is that a du -k shows a total usage for that file system of much less than df -k. du -k essentially shows the disk usage before the available space started to disappear! Normally I'd presume someone's hiding files under a mount point when I see this but nothings mounted on a directory in this filesystem. Upon reboot the space is not used anymore, df -k and du -k report similar values. Quite simply odd. Some other details... ...this has happened twice in one day, and the rate of ghost disk usage is constant and identical in both graphs. The file server is used to serve files to clustered web servers. There's considerable write activity to the NFS server all the time (40-60Mbit/sec) and moderate read access (~10Mbit/sec). Any ideas what would cause the df -k and du -k discrepancy? That sounds like some program keeps one or more files open and writes to it while the directory entry for the file has been removed. (Probably some log file which is kept open, but it might be something else.) Space used by a file is not marked as free until all directory entries referring to the file has been removed AND no program has the file open. This is the normal cause for df/du discrepancies that you describe. -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disk Usage
Michael Conlen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Any ideas what would cause the df -k and du -k discrepancy? FAQ entry: The du and df commands show different amounts of disk space available. What is going on? http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/disks.html#DU-VS-DF ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
