Why so big?

[Karl Larsen]

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