Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-31 Thread Mel
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

Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-30 Thread Mel
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

RE: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-30 Thread Brendan Hart
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

Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-30 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
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

RE: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-30 Thread Brendan Hart
#: 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%

Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-30 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
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 441M

Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-30 Thread Kevin Kinsey
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 496M

RE: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-30 Thread Brendan Hart
-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

Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-29 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
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

RE: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-29 Thread Brendan Hart
@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

Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-29 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
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

RE: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-29 Thread Brendan Hart
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

Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition

2008-10-29 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
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.