On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 02:09:04 +0100
Frank Steinmetzger war...@gmx.de wrote:
Disk manufacturers measure kilos of data as 1000
Everyone else measures it in 1024
Well, to nitpick, they say it correctly, as for their kilo, 10^3
bytes is correct. We, the binary folk, assert kilo to be 2^10
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 01:59:41 +0100, Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
It just means that before the drive gets physically full (which means
that files will fragment more), it will get logically full earlier.
This is why there can be expected less fragmentation under extreme
circumstances (i.e. an
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 20:38:13 -0600
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Alex Schuster wrote:
Dale writes:
I have a question on this. I have a drive that I use for movies
and such. There is nothing OS related on that drive. Would it be
safe to set this to say 1% or even 0?
I'd say
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 01:10:05 -0600
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 20:38:13 -0600, Dale wrote:
tune2fs -m 1 /dev/data/data1
Which is where the ext4 file system is on the LVM. After I run
that then I can expand LVM from there, I hope it
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:25:00 +0100
Alex Schuster wo...@wonkology.org wrote:
Neil Bothwick writes:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 14:01:50 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote:
If you instantly need more space, reduce the amount of reserved
space for the superuser, which is 5% as default:
tune2fs -m 2
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 01:10:05 -0600, Dale wrote:
tune2fs -m 1 /dev/data/data1
Which is where the ext4 file system is on the LVM. After I run that
then I can expand LVM from there, I hope it works that easy.
It does.
Apparently I am missing something then. I looked at cfdisk for
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:29:45 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
It means there's no single sane default anymore. On my servers I set
reserved space to 100M or so as that's what I need. I reckon the
average person should keep it to somewhat larger than the biggest
single file you expect to store on
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:57:19 +
Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:29:45 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
It means there's no single sane default anymore. On my servers I set
reserved space to 100M or so as that's what I need. I reckon the
average person should
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 12:40:33 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
When $LUSER fills up his drive it can be that root is the only user
that can properly mount and access the filesystem. So whatever the
$LUSER was doing that filled up the drive needs to be undone by root,
probably by shuffling stuff
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:08:49 +
Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 12:40:33 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
When $LUSER fills up his drive it can be that root is the only user
that can properly mount and access the filesystem. So whatever the
$LUSER was doing that
On February 29, 2012 at 2:43 AM J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Wed, February 29, 2012 2:01 am, Alex Schuster wrote:
Dale writes:
Alex Schuster wrote:
snipped
Also, it is already set up with LVM and
ext4. Can I change it even while there is data on there?
Sure!
Alan McKinnon wrote:
They don't interfere with each other.
LVM and the size of the filesystem is one thing. Reserved space is
something else, completely unrelated.
Ahhh, light bulb moment. Gotcha !!
Dale
:-) :-)
--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you
J. Roeleveld wrote:
On Wed, February 29, 2012 2:01 am, Alex Schuster wrote:
Dale writes:
Alex Schuster wrote:
snipped
Also, it is already set up with LVM and
ext4. Can I change it even while there is data on there?
Sure! Cool, isn't it. Just call lvresize -L +1G
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 02:11:41PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
I've never failed to fix that by deleting a file as the user that
created it, usually the partial file that caused the problem, but I
can see why you may want to keep a small amount reserved for that.
However, I still don't
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:23:11AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
So, cfdisk is happy with the change but nothing else seems to see it.
What am I missing here? Where did the 50Gbs go to?
Dale
:-) :-)
Nowhere.
Disk manufacturers measure kilos of data as 1000
Everyone else
Hi everyone,
I'm experiencing a major problem right now. I've been using gentoo for
several months now and I simply lllooove it!
So here's the thing. When I use gentoo for a long time, even without
updating the current pack of installed software (emerge -uD world), I am
left without disk space...
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 11:37:44 +
trevor donahue donahue.tre...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm experiencing a major problem right now. I've been using gentoo for
several months now and I simply lllooove it!
So here's the thing. When I use gentoo for a long time, even without
updating the
On Tuesday 28 Feb 2012 11:37:44 trevor donahue wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm experiencing a major problem right now. I've been using gentoo for
several months now and I simply lllooove it!
So here's the thing. When I use gentoo for a long time, even without
updating the current pack of installed
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:37:44AM +, trevor donahue wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm experiencing a major problem right now. I've been using gentoo for
several months now and I simply lllooove it!
So here's the thing. When I use gentoo for a long time, even without
updating the current pack of
wow that was fast
thanks a lot guys!
done some research, turns out in home there is a .cache and the folder
chromium there takes nearly 600mb, cleared chromium browsing / download
history, cleared the cache. that freed it.
Nikos Chantziaras, thanks, will test it tonight
YoYo Siska, thanks
trevor donahue writes:
So here's the thing. When I use gentoo for a long time, even without
updating the current pack of installed software (emerge -uD world), I am
left without disk space... In situations like this I start deleting
/var/tmp/*, /tmp/*, /usr/portage/distfiles/*, maybe do even
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 12:50:02 +, trevor donahue wrote:
YoYo Siska, thanks for the good idea, put -doc in make.conf and nodoc
in FEATURES
You may want to reconsider the latter. The doc USE flag controls extra
documentation, such as API stuff, while still installing man ages etc.
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 14:01:50 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote:
If you instantly need more space, reduce the amount of reserved space
for the superuser, which is 5% as default:
tune2fs -m 2 /dev/your/partition
Don't reduce it to 0, the lower this value is, the more fragmentation
you will get.
Why
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 13:52 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 11:37:44 +
trevor donahue donahue.tre...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm experiencing a major problem right now. I've been using gentoo for
several months now and I simply lllooove it!
So here's the
On 28 February 2012 11:37, trevor donahue donahue.tre...@gmail.com wrote:
In situations like this I start deleting
/var/tmp/*, /tmp/*, /usr/portage/distfiles/*, maybe do even a revdep-rebuild
to fix something, but even then I'm left with no more then 100 mb, which
obviously is not enough ...
Neil Bothwick writes:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 14:01:50 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote:
If you instantly need more space, reduce the amount of reserved space
for the superuser, which is 5% as default:
tune2fs -m 2 /dev/your/partition
Don't reduce it to 0, the lower this value is, the more
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:25:00 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote:
Don't reduce it to 0, the lower this value is, the more
fragmentation you will get.
Why is that? I would have expected more usable space to reduce the
need for fragmentation. I routinely use 0 on non-system filesystems.
Alex Schuster wrote:
If you instantly need more space, reduce the amount of reserved space for
the superuser, which is 5% as default:
tune2fs -m 2 /dev/your/partition
Don't reduce it to 0, the lower this value is, the more fragmentation you
will get.
I have a question on this. I have a
Dale writes:
Alex Schuster wrote:
If you instantly need more space, reduce the amount of reserved space
for the superuser, which is 5% as default:
tune2fs -m 2 /dev/your/partition
Don't reduce it to 0, the lower this value is, the more fragmentation
you will get.
I have a question
Neil Bothwick writes:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:25:00 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote:
Don't reduce it to 0, the lower this value is, the more
fragmentation you will get.
Why is that? I would have expected more usable space to reduce the
need for fragmentation. I routinely use 0 on
Alex Schuster wrote:
Dale writes:
I have a question on this. I have a drive that I use for movies and
such. There is nothing OS related on that drive. Would it be safe to
set this to say 1% or even 0?
I'd say 1% is okay. For 0% I'm not sure, I avoid that, but maybe there
will be no
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 20:38:13 -0600, Dale wrote:
tune2fs -m 1 /dev/data/data1
Which is where the ext4 file system is on the LVM. After I run that
then I can expand LVM from there, I hope it works that easy.
It does.
--
Neil Bothwick
The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten per
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 02:05:41 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote:
But if you set m 0, the filesystem will become full sooner, so
fragmentation will begin sooner (for non-root processes).
Uh, really? I wouldn't think so. With m 0, there is much space left,
in large contiguous chunks, even
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 20:38:13 -0600, Dale wrote:
tune2fs -m 1 /dev/data/data1
Which is where the ext4 file system is on the LVM. After I run that
then I can expand LVM from there, I hope it works that easy.
It does.
Apparently I am missing something then. I
On Wed, February 29, 2012 2:01 am, Alex Schuster wrote:
Dale writes:
Alex Schuster wrote:
snipped
Also, it is already set up with LVM and
ext4. Can I change it even while there is data on there?
Sure! Cool, isn't it. Just call lvresize -L +1G /dev/mapper/whatever or
something, and
On Wed, February 29, 2012 8:10 am, Dale wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 20:38:13 -0600, Dale wrote:
tune2fs -m 1 /dev/data/data1
Which is where the ext4 file system is on the LVM. After I run that
then I can expand LVM from there, I hope it works that easy.
It does.
36 matches
Mail list logo
