On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Neal Murphy neal.p.mur...@alum.wpi.edu wrote:
On Wednesday, November 06, 2013 07:44:18 AM Wawrzek Niewodniczanski wrote:
This is a bit off main topic, but definitely 'on' for this list. Lets
imagine a scenario there is nothing to delete on the troublesome
On Wed, 6 Nov 2013 21:45:28 -0800
un...@physics.ubc.ca (unruh) wrote:
In linux.debian.user, you wrote:
On Mon, 04 Nov 2013 21:51:26 -0600
Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote:
...
Food for thought: your /dev/sda7 is an EXT filesystem of 26GB with 1.7M
inodes. XFS would give
On 5 November 2013 02:30, Tazman Deville tazmande...@gmx.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 06:43:45PM -0500, Hecber Cordova wrote:
Hi,
Did you check inodes usage? (df -i)
I could be inodes availability rather than block availability.
[...]
I have no idea what the significance of
On Wednesday, November 06, 2013 07:44:18 AM Wawrzek Niewodniczanski wrote:
This is a bit off main topic, but definitely 'on' for this list. Lets
imagine a scenario there is nothing to delete on the troublesome
partition, but there is another disk. What would be the best tool to
move data to
On 6 November 2013 13:43, Neal Murphy neal.p.mur...@alum.wpi.edu wrote:
Assuming the problem is /var/log is part of the root filesystem and is crammed
with millions of files. Assume other drive is /dev/sdb. The general process is
as follows.
1. Reboot to single-user
2. Add partition #1 to
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 11:43:09AM -0500, Neal Murphy wrote:
3. 'mkreiserfs /dev/sdb1' # to avoid the whole issue of inodes
Before opting for ReiserFS (version 3), users would be advised to
do some reading on the current level of support it attracts in the
kernel, and possibly seek out some
Neal Murphy neal.p.mur...@alum.wpi.edu wrote:
3. 'mkreiserfs /dev/sdb1' # to avoid the whole issue of inodes
Really? ReiserFS 3 is dead, IMHO and ReiserFS 4 was never included in
any vanilla kernel.
I'd suggest XFS or a properly configured ext4.
Sure, ext4 has a fixed set of inodes, but
On Wednesday, November 06, 2013 12:11:33 PM Beco wrote:
On 6 November 2013 13:43, Neal Murphy neal.p.mur...@alum.wpi.edu wrote:
Assuming the problem is /var/log is part of the root filesystem and is
crammed with millions of files. Assume other drive is /dev/sdb. The
general process is as
On Mon, 04 Nov 2013 21:51:26 -0600
Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote:
...
Food for thought: your /dev/sda7 is an EXT filesystem of 26GB with 1.7M
inodes. XFS would give you ~23M inodes on a 26GB filesystem.
An ext[2-4] filesystem can be created with any desired number inodes by
On 11/4/2013 10:28 PM, Tazman Deville wrote:
...
Got it!
find . -name 'popularity-*' | xargs rm -rf
(passes the files to rm one at a time).
Glad you got it squared away Anthony. Normally I'd suggest filing a bug
report against the problem application, but since the system is Squeeze
it's
On 11/5/2013 1:21 AM, Richard Hector wrote:
On 05/11/13 16:51, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Second, you have a serious problem here because it is your root
filesystem that has run out of inodes. You need to ask yourself why you
have 1.7M files in your rootfs. That's very dumb.
Or perhaps That's
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 05:28:16AM +0100, Tazman Deville wrote:
find . -name 'popularity-*' | xargs rm -rf
Sorry, opportunity for a bit of golf. Find has a built-in for deleting
files:
find . -type f -name 'popularity-*' -delete
I'd also be rather wary of invoking rm -rf with the results of
Hi.
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 09:41:58AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 05:28:16AM +0100, Tazman Deville wrote:
find . -name 'popularity-*' | xargs rm -rf
Sorry, opportunity for a bit of golf. Find has a built-in for deleting
files:
find . -type f -name
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 02:52:52AM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 11/5/2013 1:21 AM, Richard Hector wrote:
On 05/11/13 16:51, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Second, you have a serious problem here because it is your root
filesystem that has run out of inodes. You need to ask yourself why you
have
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 09:41:58AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 05:28:16AM +0100, Tazman Deville wrote:
find . -name 'popularity-*' | xargs rm -rf
Sorry, opportunity for a bit of golf. Find has a built-in for deleting
files:
find . -type f -name 'popularity-*'
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:13:10PM +0400, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 09:41:58AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 05:28:16AM +0100, Tazman Deville wrote:
find . -name 'popularity-*' | xargs rm -rf
Sorry, opportunity for a bit of golf. Find has a
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:13:10PM +0400, Reco wrote:
perl -e 'for(popularity-*){((stat)[9](unlink))}'
I have two questions. Why before unlink and why stat[9] there?
stat[9] is mtime.
Regards,
/Lars
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:13:10PM +0400, Reco wrote:
find . -type f -name 'popularity-*' -print0 | xargs -0rn 20 rm -f
I idly wonder (don't know) to what extend find might parallelize the
unlinks with -delete. A cursory scan of the semantics would suggest it
could potentially do so: it's not
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 02:29:10PM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:13:10PM +0400, Reco wrote:
find . -type f -name 'popularity-*' -print0 | xargs -0rn 20 rm -f
I idly wonder (don't know) to what extend find might parallelize the
unlinks with -delete. A cursory scan
Hi.
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 04:25:13PM +0200, Lars Noodén wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:13:10PM +0400, Reco wrote:
perl -e 'for(popularity-*){((stat)[9](unlink))}'
I have two questions. Why before unlink and why stat[9] there?
You have to pass unlink something to delete. Stat is
On 11/05/2013 05:33 PM, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 04:25:13PM +0200, Lars Noodén wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:13:10PM +0400, Reco wrote:
perl -e 'for(popularity-*){((stat)[9](unlink))}'
I have two questions. Why before unlink and why stat[9] there?
You have to pass
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 07:15:19PM +0400, Reco wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 02:29:10PM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:13:10PM +0400, Reco wrote:
find . -type f -name 'popularity-*' -print0 | xargs -0rn 20 rm -f
I idly wonder (don't know) to what extend find
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 04:54:19PM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
The binary size effects the initial load-up time which, for small
numbers of files/short execution times, may be the lions share of
the total execution time. However as you point out, for orders of
magnitute like 500,000; it's
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Tazman Deville tazmande...@gmx.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 08:34:37AM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
[...]
The first thing that I check when I get disk full errors but the disks
are not full is the permissions.
And the second thing should be the inodes, but I
Just since yesterday, I'm seeing this PHP error
on the scuttle installation on a little server here
I have.
Scuttle is installed from the debian repos.
The server is running Squeeze still (I know..
I should upgrade it, but I'll spend a day ironing
out dovecot and postfix when I do, so haven't
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Tazman Deville tazmande...@gmx.com wrote:
Just since yesterday, I'm seeing this PHP error
meaning the No space left on device (28) you mention in the subject,
I suppose.
on the scuttle installation on a little server here
I have.
Scuttle is installed from the
Hi,
Did you check inodes usage? (df -i)
I could be inodes availability rather than block availability.
Best regards,
HC
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Tazman Deville tazmande...@gmx.com wrote:
Just since yesterday, I'm seeing this PHP error
on the scuttle installation on a little server
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 08:34:37AM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Tazman Deville tazmande...@gmx.com wrote:
Just since yesterday, I'm seeing this PHP error
meaning the No space left on device (28) you mention in the subject,
I suppose.
on the scuttle
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 06:43:45PM -0500, Hecber Cordova wrote:
Hi,
Did you check inodes usage? (df -i)
I could be inodes availability rather than block availability.
AHA!
I have no idea what the significance of this is, but
df -i gives
$ df -i
FilesystemInodes
Hi,
inodes are basically metadata (http://www.linfo.org/inode.html). It looks
like you have a lot of files in the root directory (most probably small
files), and your system has used all available inodes. You cannot add more
inodes without re-creating the file system (mkfs), this is because the
On 11/4/2013 8:30 PM, Tazman Deville wrote:
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 06:43:45PM -0500, Hecber Cordova wrote:
Hi,
Did you check inodes usage? (df -i)
I could be inodes availability rather than block availability.
AHA!
I have no idea what the significance of this is, but
df -i
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 09:51:26PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 11/4/2013 8:30 PM, Tazman Deville wrote:
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 06:43:45PM -0500, Hecber Cordova wrote:
Hi,
Did you check inodes usage? (df -i)
I could be inodes availability rather than block availability.
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 05:14:34AM +0100, Tazman Deville wrote:
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 09:51:26PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 11/4/2013 8:30 PM, Tazman Deville wrote:
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 06:43:45PM -0500, Hecber Cordova wrote:
Hi,
Did you check inodes usage? (df -i)
On 05/11/13 16:51, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Second, you have a serious problem here because it is your root
filesystem that has run out of inodes. You need to ask yourself why you
have 1.7M files in your rootfs. That's very dumb.
Or perhaps That's not generally advisable. or similar.
Richard
On Tuesday, November 05, 2013 02:21:36 AM Richard Hector wrote:
On 05/11/13 16:51, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Second, you have a serious problem here because it is your root
filesystem that has run out of inodes. You need to ask yourself why you
have 1.7M files in your rootfs. That's very dumb.
35 matches
Mail list logo
