From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Corey Hickey Subject: Re: RAID 5: weird size results after Grow Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 10:59:51 -0700 Message-ID: <47110797.2050009@fatooh.org> References: <47107DB5.10103@iki.fi> <4710C337.40708@tmr.com> <4710F021.30508@iki.fi> <4710FDAA.3050408@fatooh.org> <47110143.4060807@iki.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Justin Piszcz Cc: Marko Berg , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids 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