On Sun, 2006-02-12 at 15:23 -0500, Mark Haney wrote: > Robert Locke wrote: > > On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 11:26 -0500, Mark Haney wrote: > > > >> I am having a problem with df reporting the wrong disk size on a couple > >> of 7TB arrays on a Fedora box we are using. I have an lvm group on each > >> array of 6.36TB when I run df this is what I get: > >> > >> /dev/mapper/Volume02-Volume02lv > >> 2.4T 33M 2.3T 1% /mnt/arrays/array2 > >> /dev/mapper/Volume03-Volume03lv > >> 2.4T 950G 1.3T 43% /mnt/arrays/array1 > >> > >> > >> When I run vg display this is what it reports: > >> > >> pvdisplay PV Name /dev/sdd > >> pvdisplay VG Name Volume03 > >> pvdisplay PV Size 6.36 TB / not usable 6.00 TB > >> pvdisplay Allocatable yes (but full) > >> pvdisplay PE Size (KByte) 4096 > >> pvdisplay Total PE 1666397 > >> pvdisplay Free PE 0 > >> pvdisplay Allocated PE 1666397 > >> pvdisplay PV UUID UlaSJI-9Srm-e3AW-LdNW-g2HG-v6ZE-4yWwPw > >> pvdisplay > >> pvdisplay --- Physical volume --- > >> pvdisplay PV Name /dev/sdc > >> pvdisplay VG Name Volume02 > >> pvdisplay PV Size 6.36 TB / not usable 6.00 TB > >> pvdisplay Allocatable yes (but full) > >> pvdisplay PE Size (KByte) 4096 > >> pvdisplay Total PE 1666397 > >> pvdisplay Free PE 0 > >> pvdisplay Allocated PE 1666397 > >> pvdisplay PV UUID mK7WWj-UV0p-N6Qc-zhx6-EK3J-g0CO-g65ljs > >> > >> > >> I've looked around for a lvm tool to display the correct sizes, but > >> can't find one. Is there something I'm missing? > >> > >> > >> > > > > Not sure why you are using LVM if you are going to entirely allocate the > > VG, might as well just use the partition directly.... > > > > First problem. Given the PE Size of 4MiB, you might be hitting a limit > > on how much of the PV can be used. You probably should have bumped up > > the PE Size when you created the VG.... Take a look at the man page for > > vgcreate (no it can't be changed after the fact), but this may identify > > the "not usable" phrase you are seeing. > > > > pvdisplay has nothing to do with the filesystems, supplying that means > > nothing. > > > > Now lvdisplay will show you the size of the underlying logical volume > > (Virtual partition). df is showing you the size of the filesystem laid > > on top of that logical volume. You haven't told us what Fedora version > > you are running, but, yes, I would be concerned about it reporting > > 2TiB.... Showing us lvdisplay output and tune2fs output could probably > > tell someone more.... > > > > --Rob > > > > > Okay here's the output of lvdisplay, as you see it shows the correct > volume size of 6.36TB: > > lvdisplay Finding all logical volumes > lvdisplay --- Logical volume --- > lvdisplay LV Name /dev/Volume03/Volume03lv > lvdisplay VG Name Volume03 > lvdisplay LV UUID KIP9EC-cmXg-Aa3A-XwQE-Cfuk-c3gq-JFp2az > lvdisplay LV Write Access read/write > lvdisplay LV Status available > lvdisplay # open 1 > lvdisplay LV Size 6.36 TB > lvdisplay Current LE 1666397 > lvdisplay Segments 1 > lvdisplay Allocation next free (default) > lvdisplay Read ahead sectors 0 > lvdisplay Block device 253:2 > lvdisplay > lvdisplay --- Logical volume --- > lvdisplay LV Name /dev/Volume02/Volume02lv > lvdisplay VG Name Volume02 > lvdisplay LV UUID F4J6HR-WeND-0RoP-849M-TBJ8-XQl8-62XD1O > lvdisplay LV Write Access read/write > lvdisplay LV Status available > lvdisplay # open 1 > lvdisplay LV Size 6.36 TB > lvdisplay Current LE 1666397 > lvdisplay Segments 1 > lvdisplay Allocation next free (default) > lvdisplay Read ahead sectors 0 > lvdisplay Block device 253:1 > lvdisplay > > > I am not completely familiar with tune2fs so bear with me on that > output. Oh, and I'm running this on FC2 unfortunately. It's a > production system that was NOT built by me, but I cannot take it out of > service to upgrade to a newer OS. I firmly believe this to be a > limitation of the versions of the e2fsprogs tools. > > OK, so lvdisplay showing the full amount is good, so the underlying virtual partition is 6.36TB.... Now the tune2fs I was suggesting was simply the -l option that would dump the ext2/3 superblock. We should be able to see the "block count" and the "block size" which when multiplied should be 6.36TB. Since you are at least on a 2.6 kernel, I don't think we have the 2TB filesystem limit, though I don't remember when that got bumped up to 32.... --Rob
