FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-18-2008, 06:39 PM
Mike Bird
 
Default Why so big?

On Sun May 18 2008 11:23:02 Karl Larsen wrote:
> Well Mike the system does fsck every so often and there is no -f in
> fsck. So I really think what we have is a tiny orphan inode that happens
> when you bring the ext3 file system down wrong, I do not see this making
> the change from 6 to 2 Gb.

Karl,

There may not be a -f in "man fsck" but the fsck command supports -f
as you could very easily have verified before posting false information
to this list.

# umount /dev/md0
# fsck /dev/md0
fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
e2fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
/boot: clean, 48/48192 files, 43504/96256 blocks
# fsck -f /dev/md0
fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
e2fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
Pass 2: Checking directory structure
Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
Pass 4: Checking reference counts
Pass 5: Checking group summary information
/boot: 48/48192 files (20.8% non-contiguous), 43504/96256 blocks
# mount /dev/md0
#

A few options are deliberately omitted from man pages so that newbies
don't play with dangerous features unless recommended.

An inode is small but data blocks are attached to inodes. Some data
blocks may be directories, containing links to more orphaned inodes
and more data blocks. It's very easy to get 3GB of lost space. At
the moment you don't even know how many orphaned inodes you have,
as dumpe2fs only tells you the first.

There is at least one other possible place where the lost space could
be, but please run fsck or else stop wasting people's time on this list.

--Mike Bird

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-18-2008, 07:40 PM
Ansgar Burchardt
 
Default Why so big?

Hi,

Mike Bird <mgb-ubuntu@yosemite.net> writes:
> There may not be a -f in "man fsck" but the fsck command supports -f
> as you could very easily have verified before posting false information
> to this list.

> A few options are deliberately omitted from man pages so that newbies
> don't play with dangerous features unless recommended.

Actually the "-f" option is documented in e2fsck(8), as are other
filesystem-specific options for ext2/3. This is also mentioned in
fsck(8).

I think it is a bad idea to omit options from man pages just so
"newbies" won't find them. This makes them harder to find if they are
really needed, and how should you find out what they actually do if
there is no documentation?

Regards,
Ansgar

--
PGP: 1024D/595FAD19 739E 2D09 0969 BEA9 9797 B055 DDB0 2FF7 595F AD19


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-18-2008, 07:56 PM
Mike Bird
 
Default Why so big?

On Sun May 18 2008 12:40:12 Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> I think it is a bad idea to omit options from man pages just so
> "newbies" won't find them. This makes them harder to find if they are
> really needed, and how should you find out what they actually do if
> there is no documentation?

Use the Source, Luke.

At minimum: Google, read, think, understand ... before acting.

Hidden "--force" options may be "really needed" but how much do
you know about the consequences of using them? If you know the
consequences of "--force" then you know that "--force" exists.

If you don't know the consequences, and you use "--force" anyway,
then it's only a matter of time before you do something that you
seriously regret.

Some commands with particularly dire consequences even require
double forcing ("-ff").

--Mike Bird

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-18-2008, 08:26 PM
Karl Larsen
 
Default Why so big?

Mike Bird wrote:
> On Sun May 18 2008 11:23:02 Karl Larsen wrote:
>
>> Well Mike the system does fsck every so often and there is no -f in
>> fsck. So I really think what we have is a tiny orphan inode that happens
>> when you bring the ext3 file system down wrong, I do not see this making
>> the change from 6 to 2 Gb.
>>
>
> Karl,
>
> There may not be a -f in "man fsck" but the fsck command supports -f
> as you could very easily have verified before posting false information
> to this list.
>
> # umount /dev/md0
> # fsck /dev/md0
> fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
> e2fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
> /boot: clean, 48/48192 files, 43504/96256 blocks
> # fsck -f /dev/md0
> fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
> e2fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
> Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
> Pass 2: Checking directory structure
> Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
> Pass 4: Checking reference counts
> Pass 5: Checking group summary information
> /boot: 48/48192 files (20.8% non-contiguous), 43504/96256 blocks
> # mount /dev/md0
> #
>
> A few options are deliberately omitted from man pages so that newbies
> don't play with dangerous features unless recommended.
>
> An inode is small but data blocks are attached to inodes. Some data
> blocks may be directories, containing links to more orphaned inodes
> and more data blocks. It's very easy to get 3GB of lost space. At
> the moment you don't even know how many orphaned inodes you have,
> as dumpe2fs only tells you the first.
>
> There is at least one other possible place where the lost space could
> be, but please run fsck or else stop wasting people's time on this list.
>
> --Mike Bird
>
>
Mike I did the stupid thing. I read the paper man fsck and there is
no -f explained there. That is why I was not sure you were right. I will
run fsck and see what effect it has.

Karl


--

Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-18-2008, 08:33 PM
Mike Bird
 
Default Why so big?

On Sun May 18 2008 13:26:50 Karl Larsen wrote:
> Mike I did the stupid thing. I read the paper man fsck and there is
> no -f explained there. That is why I was not sure you were right. I will
> run fsck and see what effect it has.

You'll get some space back but maybe not all. If you're still
missing some space after fsck we'll look under your mounts.

--Mike Bird

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-18-2008, 08:38 PM
NoOp
 
Default Why so big?

On 05/17/2008 08:31 AM, Karl Larsen wrote:

>
> The Disk Usage Analyser shows in Scan Filesystem that the root
> directroy of my 7.10 Ubuntu has a total of 18.6 GB of space. It shows
> that the partitions at /f7home is 9.8 GB and the one at /home is 6.2 GB.
> If you subtract home and f7home you get 2.6GB of space for the rest of
> the system. This is wrong.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/baobab/+bug/121168

Note:
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/baobab/+bug/121168/comments/5>
<quote>
Not a bug: in preferences, we can choose if gvfs is included in the stat
or not. If we don't check the case, baobab show correctly the stats.
</quote>

This confused me as well. I wonder why they don't set gvfs off as the
default.


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-18-2008, 08:46 PM
Karl Larsen
 
Default Why so big?

Karl Larsen wrote:
> Mike Bird wrote:
>
>> On Sun May 18 2008 11:23:02 Karl Larsen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Well Mike the system does fsck every so often and there is no -f in
>>> fsck. So I really think what we have is a tiny orphan inode that happens
>>> when you bring the ext3 file system down wrong, I do not see this making
>>> the change from 6 to 2 Gb.
>>>
>>>
>> Karl,
>>
>> There may not be a -f in "man fsck" but the fsck command supports -f
>> as you could very easily have verified before posting false information
>> to this list.
>>
>> # umount /dev/md0
>> # fsck /dev/md0
>> fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
>> e2fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
>> /boot: clean, 48/48192 files, 43504/96256 blocks
>> # fsck -f /dev/md0
>> fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
>> e2fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
>> Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
>> Pass 2: Checking directory structure
>> Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
>> Pass 4: Checking reference counts
>> Pass 5: Checking group summary information
>> /boot: 48/48192 files (20.8% non-contiguous), 43504/96256 blocks
>> # mount /dev/md0
>> #
>>
>> A few options are deliberately omitted from man pages so that newbies
>> don't play with dangerous features unless recommended.
>>
>> An inode is small but data blocks are attached to inodes. Some data
>> blocks may be directories, containing links to more orphaned inodes
>> and more data blocks. It's very easy to get 3GB of lost space. At
>> the moment you don't even know how many orphaned inodes you have,
>> as dumpe2fs only tells you the first.
>>
>> There is at least one other possible place where the lost space could
>> be, but please run fsck or else stop wasting people's time on this list.
>>
>> --Mike Bird
>>
>>
>>
> Mike I did the stupid thing. I read the paper man fsck and there is
> no -f explained there. That is why I was not sure you were right. I will
> run fsck and see what effect it has.
>
> Karl
>
>
>
To run fsck I had to come up in a rescue cd which is the 7.10
LiveCD. There I got a terminal and did sudo fsck /dev/hda8 which eneded
quick saying all was well. Then I did the sudo fsck -f /dev/hda8 and
that took much longer but wound up at the same spot. So now back on
/dev/hda8 and df has the same results I have sent several times. The
effect of running fsck both ways was nothing I can measure.

Karl


--

Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-18-2008, 08:57 PM
Mike Bird
 
Default Why so big?

On Sun May 18 2008 13:46:01 Karl Larsen wrote:
> Karl Larsen wrote:
> To run fsck I had to come up in a rescue cd which is the 7.10
> LiveCD. There I got a terminal and did sudo fsck /dev/hda8 which eneded
> quick saying all was well. Then I did the sudo fsck -f /dev/hda8 and
> that took much longer but wound up at the same spot. So now back on
> /dev/hda8 and df has the same results I have sent several times. The
> effect of running fsck both ways was nothing I can measure.

It should have recovered the orphaned inodes (you can check with dumpe2fs)
but it sounds like they were not the major part of your problem.

The only other place I know of to look is under your mounts. I'll show
you on my /boot. You'll want to do something like this for each of your
mounts that is (a) a real file system and (b) not the root file system.
In some cases you may have to cd to root or even shut down your desktop
or even boot into recovery mode in order that nothing is using a mount
so it can be unmounted.

# cd /
# umount /boot
# du /boot
184 /boot/grub
188 /boot
# mount /boot

In this case I had 188KB hidden under my /boot mount. Not enough to
worry about. I suspect you'll find a few gigs under one of your mounts.
If so, you can delete the stuff from the mount point (but not the mount
point itself) or move it from under the mount point so you can think
about it later and decide what to do with it.

--Mike Bird

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-18-2008, 10:18 PM
Karl Larsen
 
Default Why so big?

Mike Bird wrote:
> On Sun May 18 2008 13:46:01 Karl Larsen wrote:
>
>> Karl Larsen wrote:
>> To run fsck I had to come up in a rescue cd which is the 7.10
>> LiveCD. There I got a terminal and did sudo fsck /dev/hda8 which eneded
>> quick saying all was well. Then I did the sudo fsck -f /dev/hda8 and
>> that took much longer but wound up at the same spot. So now back on
>> /dev/hda8 and df has the same results I have sent several times. The
>> effect of running fsck both ways was nothing I can measure.
>>
>
> It should have recovered the orphaned inodes (you can check with dumpe2fs)
> but it sounds like they were not the major part of your problem.
>
> The only other place I know of to look is under your mounts. I'll show
> you on my /boot. You'll want to do something like this for each of your
> mounts that is (a) a real file system and (b) not the root file system.
> In some cases you may have to cd to root or even shut down your desktop
> or even boot into recovery mode in order that nothing is using a mount
> so it can be unmounted.
>
> # cd /
> # umount /boot
> # du /boot
> 184 /boot/grub
> 188 /boot
> # mount /boot
>
> In this case I had 188KB hidden under my /boot mount. Not enough to
> worry about. I suspect you'll find a few gigs under one of your mounts.
> If so, you can delete the stuff from the mount point (but not the mount
> point itself) or move it from under the mount point so you can think
> about it later and decide what to do with it.
>
> --Mike Bird
>
>
Mike your not thinking right. /boot is a DIRECTORY off of /. When I
tried to umount it did the expected:

karl@karl-desktop:/$ sudo umount /boot
[sudo] password for karl:
umount: /boot: not mounted
karl@karl-desktop:/$ sudo umount boot
umount: boot: not mounted
karl@karl-desktop:/$

It is not smart enough to say it's a directory but that is the
problem. So I think your search for 4 Gb of free space is just not going
to work.


Karl


--

Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-18-2008, 10:31 PM
Mike Bird
 
Default Why so big?

On Sun May 18 2008 15:18:11 Karl Larsen wrote:
> Mike Bird wrote:
> Mike your not thinking right. /boot is a DIRECTORY off of /. When I
> tried to umount it did the expected:
>
> karl@karl-desktop:/$ sudo umount /boot
> [sudo] password for karl:
> umount: /boot: not mounted
> karl@karl-desktop:/$ sudo umount boot
> umount: boot: not mounted
> karl@karl-desktop:/$
>
> It is not smart enough to say it's a directory but that is the
> problem. So I think your search for 4 Gb of free space is just not going
> to work.

Karl,

I did not suggest that you use the procedure on your /boot. I suggested
that you use the procedure "for each of your mounts that is (a) a real
file system and (b) not the root file system." I illustrated with
my /boot, which is a mount point on most of my systems.

You have a rather unusual selection of mount points. I suggest you try
/f7home first, then /home, then /var/lock, then /var/run. They are
listed roughly in increasing likelihood that you'll need to take action
such as shutting down your desktop or rebooting in recovery mode.

--Mike Bird

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:42 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org