On Wednesday 04 February 2004 21:31, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote: > I manually created disklabels with a size number of 10485760. > I wanted to have 5 GigaByte big labels, so 5*1024*1024*1024/512=10485760. > Now after doing a newfs and mounting the new label, df -h reports a size > of 4.8GB. > Can someone please enlighten me? Which df column? If you're concerned about "missing" blocks, what does "df -b" or "df -k" report? What parameters did you use for newfs? You can expect to lose 3-5% of disk space for metadata overheads. Each inode taken 256 bytes and each cylinder group takes several FS blocks. If you want to fit 5GB of data onto a filesystem, you're going to need to allocate something like 5.2GB of disk space. >But it's not my problem. What you mean results in limited available space, > but doesn't have any influence on Size summary. Btw I did a newfs with -m 0 > so it can't be the reaseon. This is strongly non-recommended. The UFS algorithms are designed on the assumption that there are always free blocks. When you get below 5-10% free space, the performance will degrade significantly and you will start getting file fragmentation. PeterReceived on Thu Feb 05 2004 - 22:22:56 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:41 UTC