search for: 25t

Hi Nithya, I applied the workarround for this bug and now df shows the right size: [root at stor1 ~]# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sdb1 26T 1,1T 25T 4% /mnt/glusterfs/vol0 /dev/sdc1 50T 16T 34T 33% /mnt/glusterfs/vol1 stor1data:/volumedisk0 101T 3,3T 97T 4% /volumedisk0 stor1data:/volumedisk1 197T 61T 136T 31% /volumedisk1 [root at stor2 ~]# df -h Filesystem S...

...lt;jocarbur at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Nithya, > > I applied the workarround for this bug and now df shows the right size: > > That is good to hear. > [root at stor1 ~]# df -h > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/sdb1 26T 1,1T 25T 4% /mnt/glusterfs/vol0 > /dev/sdc1 50T 16T 34T 33% /mnt/glusterfs/vol1 > stor1data:/volumedisk0 > 101T 3,3T 97T 4% /volumedisk0 > stor1data:/volumedisk1 > 197T 61T 136T 31% /volumedisk1 > > > [root at s...

...; Hi Nithya, >> >> I applied the workarround for this bug and now df shows the right size: >> >> That is good to hear. > > > >> [root at stor1 ~]# df -h >> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on >> /dev/sdb1 26T 1,1T 25T 4% /mnt/glusterfs/vol0 >> /dev/sdc1 50T 16T 34T 33% /mnt/glusterfs/vol1 >> stor1data:/volumedisk0 >> 101T 3,3T 97T 4% /volumedisk0 >> stor1data:/volumedisk1 >> 197T 61T 136T 31% /volumedisk1 >&...

...applied the workarround for this bug and now df shows the right size: >>> >>> That is good to hear. >> >> >> >>> [root at stor1 ~]# df -h >>> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on >>> /dev/sdb1 26T 1,1T 25T 4% /mnt/glusterfs/vol0 >>> /dev/sdc1 50T 16T 34T 33% /mnt/glusterfs/vol1 >>> stor1data:/volumedisk0 >>> 101T 3,3T 97T 4% /volumedisk0 >>> stor1data:/volumedisk1 >>> 197T 61T 136T 31...

...Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/sda2 48G 21G 25G 46% / > tmpfs 32G 80K 32G 1% /dev/shm > /dev/sda1 190M 62M 119M 35% /boot > /dev/sda4 395G 251G 124G 68% /data > /dev/sdb1 26T 601G 25T 3% /mnt/glusterfs/vol0 > /dev/sdc1 50T 15T 36T 29% /mnt/glusterfs/vol1 > stor1data:/volumedisk0 > 76T 1,6T 74T 3% /volumedisk0 > stor1data:/volumedisk1 > *148T* 42T 106T 29% /volumedisk1 > > Exactly 1 bri...

...s bug and now df shows the right size: >>>> >>>> That is good to hear. >>> >>> >>> >>>> [root at stor1 ~]# df -h >>>> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on >>>> /dev/sdb1 26T 1,1T 25T 4% /mnt/glusterfs/vol0 >>>> /dev/sdc1 50T 16T 34T 33% /mnt/glusterfs/vol1 >>>> stor1data:/volumedisk0 >>>> 101T 3,3T 97T 4% /volumedisk0 >>>> stor1data:/volumedisk1 >>>>...

...size: >>>>> >>>>> That is good to hear. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> [root at stor1 ~]# df -h >>>>> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on >>>>> /dev/sdb1 26T 1,1T 25T 4% /mnt/glusterfs/vol0 >>>>> /dev/sdc1 50T 16T 34T 33% /mnt/glusterfs/vol1 >>>>> stor1data:/volumedisk0 >>>>> 101T 3,3T 97T 4% /volumedisk0 >>>>> stor1data:/volumedisk1 >>>>>...

...~]# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 48G 21G 25G 46% / tmpfs 32G 80K 32G 1% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 190M 62M 119M 35% /boot /dev/sda4 395G 251G 124G 68% /data /dev/sdb1 26T 601G 25T 3% /mnt/glusterfs/vol0 /dev/sdc1 50T 15T 36T 29% /mnt/glusterfs/vol1 stor1data:/volumedisk0 76T 1,6T 74T 3% /volumedisk0 stor1data:/volumedisk1 *148T* 42T 106T 29% /volumedisk1 Exactly 1 brick minus: 196,4 TB - 49,1TB = 148T...

...n performance.write-behind-window-size: 4MB performance.cache-refresh-timeout: 1 performance.cache-size: 4GB network.frame-timeout: 60 performance.cache-max-file-size: 1GB As you can see 2 of the bricks are smaller and they're full. The gluster volume is not full of course: gl0:/w-vol 25T 21T 4.0T 84% /W/Projects I'm not able to write to the volume. Why? Is it an issue? If so, is it known? How can I stop writing to full nodes? Thanks, tamas

...45T 14T 77% /bricks/data_A2 /dev/sdd1 59T 39M 59T 1% /bricks/data_A4 /dev/sdc1 59T 1.9T 57T 4% /bricks/data_A3 server-A:/dataeng 350T 83T 268T 24% /dataeng And on server-B: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sdb1 59T 34T 25T 58% /bricks/data_B2 /dev/sdc1 59T 2.0T 57T 4% /bricks/data_B3 /dev/sdd1 59T 39M 59T 1% /bricks/data_B4 /dev/sda1 59T 38T 22T 64% /bricks/data_B1 server-B:/dataeng 350T 83T 268T 24% /dataeng Eva Freer From: Sam McLeod <mailinglists at smcleod....

Hello all, I have just configured a 64-bit CentOS 5.5 machine to support an XFS filesystem as specified in the subject line. The filesystem will be used to store an extremely large number of files (in the tens of millions). Due to its extremely large size, would there be any non-standard XFS build/configuration options I should consider? Thanks. Boris. -------------- next part -------------- An

...and W2k machine. The original smbclient did this so I upgraded to the latest, it didn't help. The server is W2k with an NTFS volume, these are video files - the windows software breaks the files at the 2G limit, but for some reason some are reported as 2G others as huge !! One day I might own 25T of disk, but not today. Anyone any ideas ? Thanks, Jon [root@jonspc bin]# smbmount Usage: mount.smbfs service mountpoint [-o options,...] Version 2.2.9 [root@jonspc bin]# uname -a Linux jonspc 2.4.20-8 #1 Thu Mar 13 17:18:24 EST 2003 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux [root@jonspc record]# ls -lt tota...

We noticed something similar. Out of interest, does du -sh . show the same size? -- Sam McLeod (protoporpoise on IRC) https://smcleod.net https://twitter.com/s_mcleod Words are my own opinions and do not necessarily represent those of my employer or partners. > On 31 Jan 2018, at 12:47 pm, Freer, Eva B. <freereb at ornl.gov> wrote: > > After OS update to CentOS 7.4 or RedHat

After OS update to CentOS 7.4 or RedHat 6.9 and update to Gluster 3.12.4, the ?df? command shows only part of the available space on the mount point for multi-brick volumes. All nodes are at 3.12.4. This occurs on both servers and clients. We have 2 different server configurations. Configuration 1: A distributed volume of 8 bricks with 4 on each server. The initial configuration had 4 bricks of

Hello list. I'm trying to rebuild the 2.6.9.67.0.20.EL kernel, but it fails even without modifications. How did I try it? Created a (non-root) build environment (not a mock ) Installed the kernel.scr.rpm and did a rpmbuild -ba --target=`uname -m` kernel-2.6.spec 2> prep-err.log | tee prep-out.log The build failed at the end: Processing files: kernel-xenU-devel-2.6.9-67.0.20.EL Checking