Re: RAID 5: weird size results after Grow

[Corey Hickey <bugfood-ml@fatooh.org>]

Justin Piszcz wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 13 Oct 2007, Marko Berg wrote:
> 
>> Corey Hickey wrote:
>>> Marko Berg wrote:
>>>> Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>>>> Marko Berg wrote:
>>>>>> Any suggestions on how to fix this, or what to investigate next, would 
>>>>>> be appreciated!
>>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure what you're trying to "fix" here, everything you posted 
>>>>> looks sane.
>>>> I'm trying to find the missing 300 GB that, as df reports, are not 
>>>> available. I ought to have a 900 GB array, consisting of four 300 GB 
>>>> devices, while only 600 GB are available. Adding the fourth device didn't 
>>>> increase the capacity of the array (visible, at least). E.g. fdisk reports 
>>>> the array size to be 900 G, but df still claims 600 capacity. Any clues 
>>>> why?
>>> df reports the size of the filesystem, which is still about 600GB--the 
>>> filesystem doesn't resize automatically when the size of the underlying 
>>> device changes.
>>>
>>> You'll need to use resize2fs, resize_reiserfs, or whatever other tool is 
>>> appropriate for your type of filesystem.
>>>
>>> -Corey 
>> Right, so this isn't one of my sharpest days... Thanks a bunch, Corey!

No problem.

> Ah, already answered.

vger.kernel.org greylisted my smtp server, so it took my message a while 
to get to the list.

-Corey