From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q289AYRX003632 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 03:10:34 -0600 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com [208.72.237.35]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id ohb1CVHy38aoiYur for ; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 01:10:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:10:33 +0000 From: Brian Candler Subject: Re: df bigger than ls? Message-ID: <20120308091033.GC23992@nsrc.org> References: <20120307155439.GA23360@nsrc.org> <20120307171619.GA23557@nsrc.org> <4F57A32A.5010704@sandeen.net> <20120308021054.GM3592@dastard> <4F5816D6.80801@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F5816D6.80801@sandeen.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 08:17:58PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > It seems worth thinking about. I guess I'm still a little concerned > about the ENOSPC case; it could lead to some confusion - I could imagine > several hundreds of gigs under preallocation, with a reasonable-sized > filesystem returning ENOSPC quite early. And presumably df on the filesystem would also show it approaching 100% utilisation? I'm used to this where a large file has been unlinked but is still open. The preallocation case is a new one to me though. How about if the total of all preallocations were limited to some small percentage of the total filesystem size? If you reach this limit and want to preallocate some space for another file you'd have to either drop or shrink an older preallocation. Regards, Brian. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs