From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q14KHX0L239546 for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2012 14:17:34 -0600 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 9OnUvT1jbNt52tlW for ; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 12:17:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F2D925A.1070702@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2012 14:17:30 -0600 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: sparsify - utility to punch out blocks of 0s in a file References: <4F2D8F30.3090802@redhat.com> <4F2D90B6.4070008@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4F2D90B6.4070008@redhat.com> 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: ext4 development , xfs-oss On 2/4/12 2:10 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Hm but something is weird, right after the punch-out xfs says > it uses 84K: > > [root@inode sparsify]# du -hc fsfile > 84K fsfile > 84K total > > but then after an xfs_repair it looks saner: > # du -hc fsfile > 4.8M fsfile > 4.8M total > > something to look into I guess... weird. nvm that's just xfs_repair zeroing the log & reinstating the blocks. Sorry for the noise - Ok, back to my Saturday. -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs