[Cluster-devel] small inconsistency presenting fs stats between GFS1 and GFS2
Fabio Massimo Di Nitto
fabbione at ubuntu.com
Sat Nov 17 07:12:46 UTC 2007
Wendy Cheng wrote:
> Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> this is purely cosmetic and I didn't prepare a patch but see this:
>>
>> given a 4GB block device (just as an example):
>>
>> /dev/nbd2 3,9G 518M 3,4G 14% /mnt/gfs2
>> /dev/nbd1 3,1G 20K 3,1G 1% /mnt/gfs
>>
>> you can see that gfs1 masks the device size to hide the journals, while gfs2
>> shows the journal as "in use" space.
>>
>> would it be possible to make gfs1 consistent with gfs2 (and probably the rest of
>> the world) by reporting the data in the same way? is it possible to do it
>> without breaking anything?
>>
>>
> I would think it is ok but this is arguable.
I mean no flamewar :)
> Say in ext3 case, if the
> journal is on an external device, will you count it as "in use" space ?
No, not really. it's not on the same device.
> I never heard our users complain about this (maybe until now ? :) ).
It's more curiosity rather than a complain. My first concern looking at df -h
was (so to speak because I knew it was due to the journals): "3.1GB device? but
I allocated 4..."
> Changing this may cause some confusions with GFS1's existing
> installation base (say customers may start to complain.. after RHEL x.y,
> we start to see diskspace usage jump or something like that ?).
The free disk % won't change and yes, I understand that you would see more disk
in use, but also the real device size would increase and maintain the same balance.
Anyway I agree that it could be confusing with both approaches.
Thanks
Fabio
--
I'm going to make him an offer he can't refuse.
More information about the Cluster-devel
mailing list