From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 31 03:11:37 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C5521065672 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 03:11:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Received: from ezekiel.daleco.biz (southernuniform.com [66.76.92.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E39D18FC1F for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 03:11:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ezekiel.daleco.biz (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m9V3BYhm063673; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:11:35 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at daleco.biz Received: from ezekiel.daleco.biz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ezekiel.daleco.biz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id vqCiiSDzEsqX; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:11:31 -0500 (CDT) Received: from archangel.daleco.biz (ezekiel.daleco.biz [66.76.92.18]) by ezekiel.daleco.biz (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m9V3BNqF063669; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:11:24 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Message-ID: <490A775B.8080004@daleco.biz> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:11:23 -0500 From: Kevin Kinsey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) Gecko/20080719 SeaMonkey/1.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeremy Chadwick References: <021f01c93a28$651752e0$2f45f8a0$@com.au> <200810301538.24819.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> <03a101c93af6$e2f654d0$a8e2fe70$@com.au> <20081031013212.GA19134@icarus.home.lan> In-Reply-To: <20081031013212.GA19134@icarus.home.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Brendan Hart , 'Mel' , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Large discrepancy in reported disk usage on USR partition X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 03:11:37 -0000 Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 11:50:39AM +1030, Brendan Hart wrote: >>>> #: df -h >>>> Filesystem Size Used Avail Capacity Mounted on >>>> /dev/aacd0s1a 496M 163M 293M 36% / >>>> devfs 1.0K 1.0K 0B 100% /dev >>>> /dev/aacd0s1e 496M 15M 441M 3% /tmp >>>> /dev/aacd0s1f 28G 25G 1.2G 96% /usr >>>> /dev/aacd0s1d 1.9G 429M 1.3G 24% /var >>> Is this output untruncated? Is df really df or an alias to 'df -t nonfs'? >> Yes, it really is the untruncated output of "df -h". I also tried the "df -t >> nonfs" and it gives exactly the same output as "df". What are you expecting >> that is not present in the output ? I would have to assume he's looking for an NFS mount ;-) >>> Is it possible that nfs directory got written to /usr at some point in >> time? >>> You would only notice this with du if the nfs directory is unmounted. >>> Unmount it and ls -al /usr/mountpoint should only give you an empty dir >> Bingo!! That is exactly the problem. An NFS mount was hiding a 17G local dir >> which had an old copy of the entire NFS mounted dir. I guess it must have >> been written incorrectly to this standby server by RSYNC before the NFS >> mount was put in place. I will add an exclusion to rsync to make sure it >> does not happen again even if the NFS dir is not mounted. >> >> Thank you for your help, you have saved me much time rebuilding this server. > > Can either of you outline what exactly happened here? I'm trying to > figure out how an "NFS mount was hiding a 17G local dir", when there's > no NFS mounts shown in the above df output. This is purely an ignorant > question on my part, but I'm not able to piece together what happened. Well, it would appear that perhaps Mel also guessed right about df being aliased? Just my guess, but, as you mention, no nfs mounts appear. I may be mistaken, but I think it's also possible to get into this sort of situation by mounting a local partition on a non-empty mountpoint---at least, it happened to me recently. Kevin Kinsey -- A triangle which has an angle of 135 degrees is called an obscene triangle.