From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Whats wrong with this picture? Message-Id: <20020121193613.J4014@lynx.turbolabs.com> References: <26540000.1011646741@duke.wrkhors.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from oolon@ankh.org on Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 12:45:23AM +0000 Sender: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Reply-To: linux-lvm@sistina.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon Jan 21 20:37:02 2002 List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: James Hawtin Cc: linux-lvm@sistina.com On Jan 22, 2002 00:45 +0000, James Hawtin wrote: > --- Physical volume --- > PV Name /dev/ide/host2/bus1/target0/lun0/part4 > VG Name sunset_vg > PV Size 11.24 GB / NOT usable 51.50 MB [LVM: 125.00 KB] > PV# 2 > PV Status available > Allocatable yes (but full) > Cur LV 4 > PE Size (KByte) 32768 > Total PE 358 > Free PE 0 > Allocated PE 358 > PV UUID 0jqg8y-LkA2-vZ1w-jHpv-cSY6-t7sh-BcmDS6 > > My PE size 32M yet my unusable space is > 32M > > I tested this with different PE sizes and found that the unusable space > reported is aways in the range >= 1PE and < 2PE > > I would have expected it in the range >=0PE and <1PE > > Why is this not so? Because the Sistina folks changed it in a recent tools release to have a _full_ empty PE available for future expansion. IMHO that is a bit of a waste, especially if you have large PEs. I would much rather that it reserve some minimum amount of free space (e.g. 4MB or whatever) and then it doesn't need to waste so much. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/ http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/