Re: df bigger than ls?
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@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs