Thomas Roth
2008-May-07 15:57 UTC
[Lustre-discuss] free space of Lustre fs: unknown quantity?
Hi all, on our test cluster I observe a rather large difference between "df" and "lfs df": > lfs df /lustre > UUID 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on > ... > filesystem summary: 137454163496 7056126648 130398036848 5% /lustre vs. > df /lustre > Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on > mds at tcp0:/lust1 137454163496 73850360 130398036848 1% /lustre Using the human readable form, df -h, shows what this means: lfs believes that 6.6TB are in use, while the system thinks it''s only 71GB. And of course, total and available space are equal. I know that these tools for checking free and used disk space are notoriously imprecise. Not surprisingly then, "du -hs /lustre" gives me just 47 GB. I think I''d like to stick to "du" - gives best looking results ;-) So, any ideas on what goes wrong here? Does something go wrong at all? Oh, btw, it is Lustre version 1.6.4.3 under Debian Etch 64 on this system. And I can observe this behavior on several clients, also after unmounting and remounting. Regards, Thomas
Andreas Dilger
2008-May-08 20:43 UTC
[Lustre-discuss] free space of Lustre fs: unknown quantity?
On May 07, 2008 17:57 +0200, Thomas Roth wrote:> on our test cluster I observe a rather large difference between "df" and > "lfs df": > > > lfs df /lustre > > UUID 1K-blocks Used > Available Use% Mounted on > > ... > > filesystem summary: 137454163496 7056126648 130398036848 > 5% /lustre > > vs. > > df /lustre > > Filesystem 1K-blocks Used > Available Use% Mounted on > > mds at tcp0:/lust1 137454163496 73850360 130398036848 > 1% /lustre > > Using the human readable form, df -h, shows what this means: lfs > believes that 6.6TB are in use, while the system thinks it''s only 71GB. > And of course, total and available space are equal. > I know that these tools for checking free and used disk space are > notoriously imprecise. Not surprisingly then, "du -hs /lustre" gives me > just 47 GB. I think I''d like to stick to "du" - gives best looking > results ;-) > > So, any ideas on what goes wrong here? Does something go wrong at all?This is bug 14283, and is fixed in 1.6.5. The problem is described best at: https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14283#c2 Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.