From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 18 03:53:13 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C075C16A4CE for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 03:53:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from dire.bris.ac.uk (dire.bris.ac.uk [137.222.10.60]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68B4A43D2D for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 03:53:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk) Received: from mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk by dire.bris.ac.uk with SMTP-PRIV with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 11:52:16 +0000 Received: from cmjg (helo=localhost) by mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 1B3w3g-0003ny-00; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 11:51:32 +0000 Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 11:51:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Jan Grant X-X-Sender: cmjg@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk To: Kyryll A Mirnenko In-Reply-To: <8181264.1079608967049.JavaMail.resin@web.ukrpost.net> Message-ID: References: <8181264.1079608967049.JavaMail.resin@web.ukrpost.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: Jan Grant cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why does `df` lie about free space (it doesn't) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 11:53:13 -0000 On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Kyryll A Mirnenko wrote: > >Using "tunefs -m". You need to be really careful doing this, and read > >the man page for tunefs again, particularly the warning about how > >lowering this number can trash your filesystem's performance. > > I don't want that, I need to allow using preserved 8% of disk space > to a little group of non-root users (for ex. postgres & rootty, my > unprivileged user), but noone more. How do I do this? You don't, without hacking filesystem code. The suggestion of another poster to buy more disk is a good one. > >PS. You keep on appearing to confuse the notion of free data >blocks with > >free inodes. They're not the same thing: they are two distinct >resources > >and your filesystem can run out of either pretty much >independently. > > inode(5) descrbes inodes as a table of block addresses kinda FAT but > with variable block sizes inodes point to. That is. It's not really like FAT operation at all; but another responder has given some detail along these lines. -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/ Theory and practice _are_ the same thing. In theory.