Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #267515 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-02-17 03:40 +0100 |
| Last post | 2024-02-19 00:10 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 47 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-17 03:40 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Gremlin <scott-andrews@columbus.rr.com> - 2024-02-17 04:00 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-17 05:50 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2024-02-17 13:40 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2024-02-17 04:00 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2024-02-17 04:00 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-17 05:50 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2024-02-17 07:10 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-17 10:20 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-02-18 08:30 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-17 07:20 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2024-02-17 21:40 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2024-02-17 22:10 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2024-02-17 22:10 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Cindy Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> - 2024-02-17 23:20 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-18 05:00 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-18 05:00 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-19 00:30 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2024-02-19 03:10 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-20 07:50 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2024-02-20 08:50 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-20 09:40 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-20 11:30 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-20 11:40 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2024-02-20 20:50 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2024-02-20 21:00 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2024-02-21 00:50 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-21 02:30 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-21 06:50 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2024-02-21 01:40 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-21 02:00 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2024-02-21 02:20 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-20 11:20 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2024-02-20 12:40 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2024-02-20 18:20 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-19 04:30 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-19 06:50 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-02-19 08:40 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2024-02-19 12:30 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-20 08:20 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-20 09:00 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2024-02-21 19:40 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-19 03:50 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2024-02-19 03:50 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-17 07:10 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2024-02-18 04:10 +0100
Re: partition reporting full, but not Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2024-02-19 00:10 +0100
Page 1 of 3 [1] 2 3 Next page →
| From | Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 03:40 +0100 |
| Subject | partition reporting full, but not |
| Message-ID | <I8iMp-aF2D-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Good afternoon All I have just rebooted this laptop to ensure it is 'fresh' / is reporting full. Trying to locate where I ran sudo du -hPx --max-depth=1 / 0 /mnt 181M /boot 15M /etc 0 /media 236M /opt 336K /root 0 /srv 4.0K /tmp 8.1G /usr 726M /var 9.2G / keith@dell0 $ Sat 17Feb2024@13:33:29 :~ But: >> sudo df -h / Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda3 36G 35G 100M 100% / keith@dell0 $ Sat 17Feb2024@13:33:39 :~ Where do I start locating the conflicting information please? -- All the best Keith Bainbridge keith.bainbridge.3216@gmail.com +61 (0)447 667 468 UTC + 10:00
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gremlin <scott-andrews@columbus.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 04:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8j5L-aF95-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267515 |
On 2/16/24 21:38, Keith Bainbridge wrote: > Good afternoon All > > I have just rebooted this laptop to ensure it is 'fresh' > > / is reporting full. > > Trying to locate where I ran > > sudo du -hPx --max-depth=1 / > 0 /mnt > 181M /boot > 15M /etc > 0 /media > 236M /opt > 336K /root > 0 /srv > 4.0K /tmp > 8.1G /usr > 726M /var > 9.2G / > keith@dell0 $ > > Sat 17Feb2024@13:33:29 > :~ > > > But: > >> sudo df -h / > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/sda3 36G 35G 100M 100% / > keith@dell0 $ > > Sat 17Feb2024@13:33:39 > :~ > > Where do I start locating the conflicting information please? > Do you have any nfs mounts?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 05:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8kOd-aGiF-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267516 |
On 17/2/24 13:55, Gremlin wrote: > On 2/16/24 21:38, Keith Bainbridge wrote: >> Good afternoon All >> >> I have just rebooted this laptop to ensure it is 'fresh' >> >> / is reporting full. >> >> Trying to locate where I ran >> >> sudo du -hPx --max-depth=1 / >> 0 /mnt >> 181M /boot >> 15M /etc >> 0 /media >> 236M /opt >> 336K /root >> 0 /srv >> 4.0K /tmp >> 8.1G /usr >> 726M /var >> 9.2G / >> keith@dell0 $ >> >> Sat 17Feb2024@13:33:29 >> :~ >> >> >> But: >> >> sudo df -h / >> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on >> /dev/sda3 36G 35G 100M 100% / >> keith@dell0 $ >> >> Sat 17Feb2024@13:33:39 >> :~ >> >> Where do I start locating the conflicting information please? >> > > Do you have any nfs mounts? > > > No nfs mounts Thankyou -- All the best Keith Bainbridge keith.bainbridge.3216@gmail.com +61 (0)447 667 468 UTC + 10:00
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | songbird <songbird@anthive.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 13:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8s94-aKJY-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267521 |
Keith Bainbridge wrote: ... > No nfs mounts any swap partition or swap space? but other than that sharing /home with / is likely your issue and you mention snapshots and backintime and i do recall that needing plenty of space. as for btrfs, i have no clue, i've never touched it. songbird
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 04:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8j5L-aF95-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267515 |
On Sat 17 Feb 2024 at 13:38:56 (+1100), Keith Bainbridge wrote:
> I have just rebooted this laptop to ensure it is 'fresh'
>
> / is reporting full.
>
> Trying to locate where I ran
>
> sudo du -hPx --max-depth=1 /
> 0 /mnt
> 181M /boot
> 15M /etc
> 0 /media
> 236M /opt
> 336K /root
> 0 /srv
> 4.0K /tmp
> 8.1G /usr
> 726M /var
> 9.2G /
> keith@dell0 $
>
> Sat 17Feb2024@13:33:29
> :~
>
>
> But:
> >> sudo df -h /
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/sda3 36G 35G 100M 100% /
> keith@dell0 $
>
> Sat 17Feb2024@13:33:39
> :~
>
> Where do I start locating the conflicting information please?
Typically some space is reserved for root, so that you have a little
headroom to extricate yourself from this situation. It looks like it's
the 5% shown below (from an installer screen):
┌────────────────────────┤ [!!] Partition disks ├─────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ You are editing partition #3 of /dev/nvme0n1. This partition is │
│ formatted with the Ext4 journaling file system. All data in it WILL │
│ BE DESTROYED! │
│ │
│ Partition settings: │
│ │
│ Name: Umbo-B │
│ Use as: Ext4 journaling file system │
│ │
│ Format the partition: yes, format it │
│ Mount point: / │
│ Mount options: defaults │
│ Label: umbo03 │
│ Reserved blocks: 5% │
│ Typical usage: standard │
│ Bootable flag: off │
│ │
│ Resize the partition (currently 31.5 GB) │
│ Erase data on this partition │
│ Delete the partition │
│ Done setting up the partition │
│ │
│ <Go Back> │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Cheers,
David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 04:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8j5L-aF95-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267515 |
On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 01:38:56PM +1100, Keith Bainbridge wrote: > >> sudo df -h / > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/sda3 36G 35G 100M 100% / First off: you don't need sudo for this, ever. Second: what kind of file system is this? > sudo du -hPx --max-depth=1 / > 0 /mnt > 181M /boot > 15M /etc > 0 /media > 236M /opt > 336K /root > 0 /srv > 4.0K /tmp > 8.1G /usr > 726M /var > 9.2G / So I guess the question is "Where's the rest of that 35 G used data?" Conspicuously missing from this output is /home. Is that a separate file system? If so, you *could* have data inside the /home directory of the root file system, which is hidden by the /home file system that's mounted over it. You'd need to unmount /home to check. It's not a super probable situation, but it's worth checking. The same applies to any other directory that's got a file system mounted on it. Or... it could be some bizarre btrfs crap. If this is a btrfs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 05:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8kOd-aGiF-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267518 |
On 17/2/24 13:52, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 01:38:56PM +1100, Keith Bainbridge wrote: >> >> sudo df -h / >> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on >> /dev/sda3 36G 35G 100M 100% / > > First off: you don't need sudo for this, ever. > > Second: what kind of file system is this? > >> sudo du -hPx --max-depth=1 / >> 0 /mnt >> 181M /boot >> 15M /etc >> 0 /media >> 236M /opt >> 336K /root >> 0 /srv >> 4.0K /tmp >> 8.1G /usr >> 726M /var >> 9.2G / > > So I guess the question is "Where's the rest of that 35 G used data?" > My wife is often telling me I'm not clear (obtuse). Thank you for clarifying the question > Conspicuously missing from this output is /home. Is that a separate > file system? If so, you *could* have data inside the /home directory > of the root file system, which is hidden by the /home file system that's > mounted over it. You'd need to unmount /home to check. It's not a > super probable situation, but it's worth checking. > I had wondered why /home was missing and concluded that as it's listed if I df -h /home/ Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda3 ===same partiton as / 36G 35G 100M 100% /home keith@dell0 $ Then >> sudo du -hPx --max-depth=1 /home/ [sudo] password for root: 2.2G /home/keith 2.2G /home/ keith@dell0 $ So, part of the missing 35G, but nothing significant I checked my daily driver - lenv0, and I have the same situation - sudo du -hPx --max-depth=1 / [sudo] password for root: 265M /boot 18M /etc 0 /media 947M /opt 1.5M /root 0 /srv du: cannot access '/tmp/.mount_Espansr8ZHig': Permission denied 12M /tmp 9.6G /usr 1.8G /var 13G / >> sudo du -hPx --max-depth=1 /home/ 3.0M /home/ke1th 3.0M /home/ keith@lenv0 $ df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on udev 7.2G 0 7.2G 0% /dev tmpfs 1.5G 1.9M 1.5G 1% /run /dev/nvme0n1p2 63G 27G 35G 44% / tmpfs 7.3G 84M 7.2G 2% /dev/shm tmpfs 5.0M 16K 5.0M 1% /run/lock /dev/nvme0n1p2 63G 27G 35G 44% /home In this case /home/keith is a sym link to another partition. But still 14GB difference between the 2 reporting processes. > The same applies to any other directory that's got a file system mounted > on it. I have had data written to /mnt/someDisk when the partition was NOT mounted. I get that suggestion. Those instances showed up in du though. > > Or... it could be some bizarre btrfs crap. If this is a btrfs. Yes the / partitions are btrfs > The annoying habit of listing /home at df seems to be part of btrfs standard practice which I dislike. So far the ability to create timeshift and BackInTime snapshots in the proverbial blink of an eye are VERY good points for btrfs. Seems I need to allow for more more 'slack' space as well? du is reporting my timeshift directory as 0, and the internal subdir that lists save file as 108K. This tells me that btrfs is doing something magic. Guess I'll be contemplating reinstalling onto ext4 in my sleep tonight. To answer another question - no NFS Thanks All -- All the best Keith Bainbridge keith.bainbridge.3216@gmail.com +61 (0)447 667 468 UTC + 10:00
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 07:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8m3D-aHiR-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267520 |
Keith Bainbridge composed on 2024-02-17 15:44 (UTC+1100): > Yes the / partitions are btrfs df was not designed for the task you gave it. You need to use btrfs filesystem <task> commands: https://btrfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/btrfs-filesystem.html -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 10:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8p1w-aIZ2-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267527 |
On 17/2/24 17:08, Felix Miata wrote: > Keith Bainbridge composed on 2024-02-17 15:44 (UTC+1100): > >> Yes the / partitions are btrfs > > df was not designed for the task you gave it. You need to use > > btrfs filesystem <task> > > commands: > https://btrfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/btrfs-filesystem.html Seems I have some serious reading to do Thanks for thelink -- All the best Keith Bainbridge keith.bainbridge.3216@gmail.com +61 (0)447 667 468 UTC + 10:00
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-18 08:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8JMB-aVI1-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267533 |
>> Keith Bainbridge composed on 2024-02-17 15:44 (UTC+1100): >> >>> Yes the / partitions are btrfs Several years ago, I installed Debian (9?) using btrfs for root (and boot?). I failed to understand that btrfs required regular maintenance and/or I was too lazy to figure it out and do it. After a few months, the systems started running slowly and I seem to recall conflicting reports of storage usage. I STFW, RTFM, etc., and tried doing the maintenance by hand. I quickly came to the conclusion that I needed to run `btrfs balance start ...` many, many times. So, I wrote Perl script and let it hammer on the file systems for hours at a time (!). I was able to rescue most of the disks to decent performance, but one was especially bad and I was only able to rescue it to marginal performance. I continued running btrfs for a while and running the Perl script periodically. Ultimatedly, I backed up, put in fresh OS disks, and installed using ext4. This was one of my reasons to use FreeBSD and ZFS for my SOHO servers. David
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 07:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8mdj-aHm3-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267520 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 03:44:49PM +1100, Keith Bainbridge wrote: [...] > df -h > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > udev 7.2G 0 7.2G 0% /dev > tmpfs 1.5G 1.9M 1.5G 1% /run > /dev/nvme0n1p2 63G 27G 35G 44% / > tmpfs 7.3G 84M 7.2G 2% /dev/shm > tmpfs 5.0M 16K 5.0M 1% /run/lock > /dev/nvme0n1p2 63G 27G 35G 44% /home [...] > Yes the / partitions are btrfs > > > The annoying habit of listing /home at df seems to be part of btrfs standard > practice which I dislike [...] Oh, wait! This is btrfs. It seems to be able to put more than one file system in a partition (so no, it's not "standard practice": you have two different file systems there, which df duly reports, but they seem to co-habitate one partition) This being btrfs... quite possibly the missing space is used up in one or more snapshots? Cheers -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | debian-user@howorth.org.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 21:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8zDz-aP97-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267520 |
Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes the / partitions are btrfs So the apparently missing space is perhaps taken up by btrfs snapshots.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 22:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8A6B-aPyd-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267548 |
> So the apparently missing space is perhaps taken up by btrfs snapshots.
Another possibility is a (few) large file(s) that is/are still open for
some process(es) but have been `rm` (`unlink`) so they don't have a name
any more.
Stefan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 22:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8A6C-aPyd-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267549 |
On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 04:00:14PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > So the apparently missing space is perhaps taken up by btrfs snapshots. > > Another possibility is a (few) large file(s) that is/are still open for > some process(es) but have been `rm` (`unlink`) so they don't have a name > any more. In the original post, they said they rebooted, in order to rule this out.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cindy Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-17 23:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8Bcl-aQ9J-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267550 |
On 2/17/24, Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 04:00:14PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> > So the apparently missing space is perhaps taken up by btrfs snapshots. >> >> Another possibility is a (few) large file(s) that is/are still open for >> some process(es) but have been `rm` (`unlink`) so they don't have a name >> any more. > > In the original post, they said they rebooted, in order to rule this out. I only know to say this because it just happened a few days ago. Rsync left some semi-permanent remnants when I was having problems with the wireless capable hard drive docking station repeatedly cutting out. I was offloading videos and images from a camera during many of those times. There were 3 to 5 instances of discarded remnant files in several directories while the problem was ongoing (MANY times over a couple weeks). The residual files were only visible when in CTRL+H view in Thunar. Sizes ranged from a few MB to almost a GB. All had to be manually removed. PS That hardware problem, which I think I mentioned in another thread, is semi-solved... and appears to be a possible case of [WIFI] jamming, of all things. If it starts up again, there will possibly be a new thread asking about potential tracking packages. Current instant fix? Tweet very loudly about the issue and its potential source.... Cindy :) NB See Also: Minnesota burglaries via suspected WIFI jamming (e.g. on reddit). -- Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA * runs with birdseed *
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-18 05:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8Gvo-aTml-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267551 |
On 18/2/24 09:19, Cindy Sue Causey wrote: > > I only know to say this because it just happened a few days ago. Rsync > left some semi-permanent remnants when I was having problems with the > wireless capable hard drive docking station repeatedly cutting out. I > was offloading videos and images from a camera during many of those > times. Thanks Cindy Interesting Though as far as I can recall the only files I have rsync'd onto / are 4or5 config files, and all in /home/keith which now on another partition. And with a gain in free space which virtually matches its reported space used, yesterday. -- All the best Keith Bainbridge keith.bainbridge.3216@gmail.com +61 (0)447 667 468 UTC + 10:00
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-18 05:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8Gvo-aTml-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267548 |
On 18/2/24 07:34, debian-user@howorth.org.uk wrote: > Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Yes the / partitions are btrfs > > So the apparently missing space is perhaps taken up by btrfs snapshots. > Seems to be the prime suspect. If that's the case, btrfs is NOT hard-linking the snapshots as timeshift claims it does. The only way to check is install on ext4 and compare. I have saves enough free space to do this. My effort to date is to move my home to /mnt/data and sim-link it into /home. df is now showing 2.3GB free on /. df showed /home as 2.2GB yesterday. At least there is a little space to play with; and give me time to consider. A fresh install may be worth checking in snapshots are as big as this all makes them look. a few brief answer to other comments will follow -- All the best Keith Bainbridge keith.bainbridge.3216@gmail.com +61 (0)447 667 468 UTC + 10:00
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-19 00:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8YLD-b4Qc-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267558 |
On 18/2/24 14:49, Keith Bainbridge wrote: > > On 18/2/24 07:34, debian-user@howorth.org.uk wrote: >> Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Yes the / partitions are btrfs >> >> So the apparently missing space is perhaps taken up by btrfs snapshots. >> > > Seems to be the prime suspect. If that's the case, btrfs is NOT hard- > linking the snapshots as timeshift claims it does. The only way to check > is install on ext4 and compare. I have saves enough free space to do this. > > My effort to date is to move my home to /mnt/data and sim-link it into / > home. df is now showing 2.3GB free on /. df showed /home as 2.2GB > yesterday. At least there is a little space to play with; and give me > time to consider. A fresh install may be worth checking in snapshots are > as big as this all makes them look. > > a few brief answer to other comments will follow So later yesterday afternoon I created a new snapshot with no obvious change is free space. I then update/upgrade. The initial attempt told me 63 upgraded, 3 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 337 MB of archives. After this operation, 473 MB of additional disk space will be used. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] But the 3 kernel related packages failed to install a couple of times. When I finally figured I should check space, there was none. I rolled back to prior to the upgrade, but still no free space. I said sometime in this thread that timeshift (and BiT) use hard links to create progressive copies of the system. The more I think about how hard links reportedly work, I reckon it can't be simply hard links. So I'm starting a new thread on that topic. -- All the best Keith Bainbridge keith.bainbridge.3216@gmail.com +61 (0)447 667 468 UTC + 10:00
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-19 03:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I91gt-b6n7-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267570 |
On 19/02/2024 06:26, Keith Bainbridge wrote: > > So later yesterday afternoon I created a new snapshot with no obvious > change is free space. Effect of snapshots is delayed. When you remove a file that does not belong to any snapshot, some disk space is reclaimed. However to restore a file (even a removed later) from a snapshot, it must be stored anywhere. That is why snapshots consume disk space. Try to remove unnecessary snapshots. I have no idea if btrfs requires additional maintenance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-20 07:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I9s6Z-bmyW-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267575 |
On 19/2/24 13:00, Max Nikulin wrote: > On 19/02/2024 06:26, Keith Bainbridge wrote: >> >> So later yesterday afternoon I created a new snapshot with no obvious >> change is free space. > > Effect of snapshots is delayed. When you remove a file that does not > belong to any snapshot, some disk space is reclaimed. However to restore > a file (even a removed later) from a snapshot, it must be stored > anywhere. That is why snapshots consume disk space. > > Try to remove unnecessary snapshots. I have no idea if btrfs requires > additional maintenance. > I just removed 3 snapshots from my daily driver with no change in used space reported by df Mindful of the fact that somebody considers it may take time to reflect changes within the snapshots, I'll check again tomorrow morning -- All the best Keith Bainbridge keith.bainbridge.3216@gmail.com +61 (0)447 667 468 UTC + 10:00
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 3 [1] 2 3 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web