[opensuse] lsm space giveth and space taketh away: missing space?
I am running low on space in my /backups partition. I looked at the partitions and volumes to see what might be done (besides deleting old backups), and noticed: pvs: PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree /dev/sdb1 Backups lvm2 a- 10.91T 3.15G --- So I thought 'cool', I didn't make it the full size, and I have some left...ok...(I didn't remember what I'd done, its been a while). Run lvresize: lvresize /dev/Backups/Backups -L +3.15G Rounding up size to full physical extent 3.15 GB Extending logical volume Backups to 10.91 TB Logical volume Backups successfully resized Um...HELLO? Extending to 10.91? But it was at 10.91! pvs: PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree /dev/sdb1 Backups lvm2 a- 10.91T 0 Well that was unimpressive. parted /dev/sdb p(rint) Disk /dev/sdb: 12.0TB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: gpt Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 17.4kB 12.0TB 12.0TB backup lvm Ok, now I'm really confused. 10.91T? 14.06T? (Obviously this was optimistic reporting if the partition is only 12TB!) So why does parted show a 12TB disk while lvm shows only a 10.91T disk and why did lvm show 3.15G free when it wasn't really there? How do I get my 1.09T back from lvm? That seems like awfully high for an overhead number for lvm. I'd expect more like "0.09T". Ideas? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 02/09/2010 11:50, Linda Walsh wrote:
I am running low on space in my /backups partition. I looked at the partitions and volumes to see what might be done (besides deleting old backups), and noticed:
pvs: PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree /dev/sdb1 Backups lvm2 a- 10.91T 3.15G
--- So I thought 'cool', I didn't make it the full size, and I have some left...ok...(I didn't remember what I'd done, its been a while).
Run lvresize: lvresize /dev/Backups/Backups -L +3.15G Rounding up size to full physical extent 3.15 GB Extending logical volume Backups to 10.91 TB Logical volume Backups successfully resized
Um...HELLO? Extending to 10.91? But it was at 10.91! pvs: PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree /dev/sdb1 Backups lvm2 a- 10.91T 0 Well that was unimpressive.
parted /dev/sdb p(rint) Disk /dev/sdb: 12.0TB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: gpt
Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 17.4kB 12.0TB 12.0TB backup lvm
Ok, now I'm really confused. 10.91T? 14.06T? (Obviously this was optimistic reporting if the partition is only 12TB!)
So why does parted show a 12TB disk while lvm shows only a 10.91T disk and why did lvm show 3.15G free when it wasn't really there?
How do I get my 1.09T back from lvm? That seems like awfully high for an overhead number for lvm. I'd expect more like "0.09T".
Ideas?
I suggest that you look at how the KBs are counted by the manufacturer and then the OS. If I recall correctly, HD mfgrers use something like ~1458 bytes (or something) = 1Kb. In one of my Windows (ex-windows ie :-) ) applications the "normal" count was 1024 bytes = 1Kb but I altered the setting to give me a "true" count of 1000 bytes = 1Kb so that I always knew where I stood. BC -- Vulgar language is the linguistic crutch of inarticulate people. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:12:35 +1000, Basil Chupin
In one of my Windows (ex-windows ie :-) ) applications the "normal" count was 1024 bytes = 1Kb but I altered the setting to give me a "true" count of 1000 bytes = 1Kb so that I always knew where I stood.
The only true thing about that is that you follow the disc manufacturers. Sizes in computerland are still powers of 2 i.e 2^^n. Philipp -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2010-09-02 11:04, Philipp Thomas wrote:
On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:12:35 +1000, Basil Chupin <> wrote:
I suggest that you look at how the KBs are counted by the manufacturer and then the OS. If I recall correctly, HD mfgrers use something like ~1458 bytes (or something) = 1Kb.
No, they use 1KB = 1000 B - which is the correct usage.
In one of my Windows (ex-windows ie :-) ) applications the "normal" count was 1024 bytes = 1Kb but I altered the setting to give me a "true" count of 1000 bytes = 1Kb so that I always knew where I stood.
The only true thing about that is that you follow the disc manufacturers. Sizes in computerland are still powers of 2 i.e 2^^n.
Yes, but the name has changed. 1024 Bytes is now one kibibyte, abbreviated 1 KiB. And 1 KB is now exactly 1000 bytes, following the same rule as for any other unit of measurement (SI). It is IEEE 1541 standard. Also IEC 60027. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix ]> Starting in about 2000, a number of standards and trade organizations approved standards and recommendations for a new set of binary prefixes, proposed earlier by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), that would refer unambiguously to powers of 1024. According to these, the SI prefixes would only be used in the decimal sense, even when referring to data storage capacities: kilobyte and megabyte would denote one thousand bytes and one million bytes respectively (consistent with SI), while new terms such as kibibyte, mebibyte and gibibyte, abbreviated KiB, MiB, and GiB, would denote 1024 bytes, 1048576 bytes, and 1073741824 bytes respectively.[1] ]> ]> In practice, the IEC binary prefixes have seen little use by the press or the US computing industry and marketplace. However, they are starting to appear in the EU computing industry and marketplace (as required by EU law since 2007),[2][3] certain US and International Government contexts (as required by contract or internal policy),[4] and popular free and open source software such as Linux.[5] We should make sure that all our software and documentation adheres to the standard, so that confusions such as the OP is experiencing do not arise again. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" GM (Elessar)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkx/g2EACgkQU92UU+smfQWvDACdElnubWDy0EGl6rsmgQSOcRVH 0TwAnje5uB4tUaQtGQIySiQhzb8fm/z3 =Uopx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. wrote:
No, they use 1KB = 1000 B - which is the correct usage.
Tiny pedantic correction. The SI prefix is 'k' rather than 'K'. Plus there's a space between the quantity and the unit. So in SI it's 1 kB rather than 1KB According to
1 KB would be using the JEDEC convention rather than SI and would mean 1024 bytes. Or would be a typo. Cheers, Dave -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2010-09-02 13:15, Dave Howorth wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
No, they use 1KB = 1000 B - which is the correct usage.
Tiny pedantic correction. The SI prefix is 'k' rather than 'K'. Plus there's a space between the quantity and the unit. So in SI it's 1 kB rather than 1KB
According to
1 KB would be using the JEDEC convention rather than SI and would mean 1024 bytes. Or would be a typo.
probably JEDED is using the old definition, not accepting the new one:
In December 2002 JEDEC, a leading standards organization in the microelectronics industry, mentioned the IEC prefixes in their Terms, Definitions, and Letter Symbols for Microcomputers, Microprocessors, and Memory Integrated Circuits document. This document defines "kilo," "mega," and "giga" with binary multipliers. A "Note" to this definition then states that that definition is only presented "to reflect common usage", and quotes the IEC in describing t
...
JEDEC Solid State Technology Association, the semiconductor engineering standardization body of the Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA), continues to include the customary binary definitions of kilo, mega and giga in their Terms, Definitions, and Letter Symbols document[58], and uses those definitions in later memory standards[59][61][62][63][60] (See also JEDEC memory standards.)
- -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" GM (Elessar)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkx/lccACgkQU92UU+smfQV2GgCghfUw8bAZGxpUf9NiTpIy4JYd CPEAn0G/cCAdYUKgsdAxSfsN6iuq8vtf =KGJN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
* Carlos E. R. (carlos.e.r@opensuse.org) [20100902 12:59]:
Yes, but the name has changed. 1024 Bytes is now one kibibyte, abbreviated 1 KiB. And 1 KB is now exactly 1000 bytes, following the same rule as for any other unit of measurement (SI).
I know. But apart from the fact that AFAIK the USA do not follow SI. That KiB/KB mess was created by people with no knowledge of the computer environment. KB has stood for 1024 bytes for decades before some beaurocrats went wild and thought that they would have to regulate things that really needn't. It's like here in Germany some folks demanding to ban all sizes in inch and always use SI units which would be ridiculous for e.g. CRT/LC screens. Philipp -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2010-09-02 13:26, Philipp Thomas wrote:
* Carlos E. R. (carlos.e.r@opensuse.org) [20100902 12:59]:
Yes, but the name has changed. 1024 Bytes is now one kibibyte, abbreviated 1 KiB. And 1 KB is now exactly 1000 bytes, following the same rule as for any other unit of measurement (SI).
I know. But apart from the fact that AFAIK the USA do not follow SI. That KiB/KB mess was created by people with no knowledge of the computer environment.
The IEEE no knowledge? >:-)
KB has stood for 1024 bytes for decades before some beaurocrats went wild and thought that they would have to regulate things that really needn't.
Rather, the computer people stole the definition of Kilo for their own uses, changing it to 1024 (a small 2% error), instead of creating their own new definition. Now that sizes are in the Tera, the difference has become very important.
It's like here in Germany some folks demanding to ban all sizes in inch and always use SI units which would be ridiculous for e.g. CRT/LC screens.
That would be an exageration, and any way, there is no confussion in the names of the units. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" GM (Elessar)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkx/kksACgkQU92UU+smfQU+wQCeJPlz+vM4lcts9IcNwrZNXhFh 1LEAnjf4PwQDizyTEQk/M4D/986XGEpg =GduX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. said the following on 09/02/2010 08:02 AM:
That would be an exageration, and any way, there is no confussion in the names of the units.
Indeed. In fact its our units of time that are really irrational. The old British units of volume were binary: JacK: 2 oz. Gill: Jack × 2 = 4 oz. Cup: Gill × 2 = 8 oz. Pint: Cup × 2 = 16 oz. Quart: Pint × 2 = 32 oz. Pottle: Quart × 2 = 64 oz. Gallon: Pottle × 2 = 4 Quarts = 128 oz. Peck: Gallon × 2 Kenning: Peck × 2 = 4 gal. Bushel: Kenning × 2 = 8 gal. Strike: Bushel × 2 = 16 gal. Coomb: Strike × 2 = 32 gal. Cask: Coomb × 2 = 64 gal. Barrel: Cask × 2 = 32 gal. Hogshead:Barrel × 2 = 64 gal. Butt: Hogshead × 2 = 128 gal. Tun: Butt × 2 = 256 gal There is a logic that underlies other measures such as Our units of time are a bit crazy: days are not the same length all the year round, and even out "definition" of a year varies depending on who you talk to. The old Roman calendar where the Senate would insert extra "months" to keep it in sync with the seasons seems crazy to us, but is ours where the "scientists" persuade the "government" to insert "leap days" and "leap seconds" any more strange? All that really matters is that we agree that we mean the same thing when we communicate. Oh, and if you have "units" program loaded you might want to see if "megafurlongs per fortnight" is a reasonable measure of speed. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 2010-09-02 15:57, Anton Aylward wrote: ...
All that really matters is that we agree that we mean the same thing when we communicate.
Right so. I have somewhere an English-Spanish dictionary made for British people long ago (pre-1900, I think, but not much), and it had a chapter on Spanish units. I was astonished at how many we had, more than the British, because each region had its variant. I can well understand that some king decided to embrace the "Metric system" as it was called then.
Oh, and if you have "units" program loaded you might want to see if "megafurlongs per fortnight" is a reasonable measure of speed.
ROTFL! X'-) -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" GM (Minas Tirith))
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 2010-09-02 13:26, Philipp Thomas wrote:
* Carlos E. R. (carlos.e.r@opensuse.org) [20100902 12:59]:
Yes, but the name has changed. 1024 Bytes is now one kibibyte, abbreviated 1 KiB. And 1 KB is now exactly 1000 bytes, following the same rule as for any other unit of measurement (SI).
I know. But apart from the fact that AFAIK the USA do not follow SI. That KiB/KB mess was created by people with no knowledge of the computer environment.
The IEEE no knowledge? >:-)
The IEEE is probably fine, but the KiB/KB idea was actually created by the IEC. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (17.8°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 9/2/2010 10:38 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 2010-09-02 13:26, Philipp Thomas wrote:
* Carlos E. R. (carlos.e.r@opensuse.org) [20100902 12:59]:
Yes, but the name has changed. 1024 Bytes is now one kibibyte, abbreviated 1 KiB. And 1 KB is now exactly 1000 bytes, following the same rule as for any other unit of measurement (SI).
I know. But apart from the fact that AFAIK the USA do not follow SI. That KiB/KB mess was created by people with no knowledge of the computer environment.
The IEEE no knowledge? >:-)
The IEEE is probably fine, but the KiB/KB idea was actually created by the IEC.
I lost track, Did Linda ever get an answer before the thread became a pontificating rant? -- _____________________________________ At one time I had a Real Sig. Its been downsized. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 2010-09-02 20:01, John Andersen wrote:
I lost track, Did Linda ever get an answer before the thread became a pontificating rant?
Yes, two: that the error can be units confusion, or a confusion of LVM reports. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" GM (Minas Tirith))
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 11:01 -0700, John Andersen wrote:
On 9/2/2010 10:38 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2010-09-02 13:26, Philipp Thomas wrote:
* Carlos E. R. (carlos.e.r@opensuse.org) [20100902 12:59]:
Yes, but the name has changed. 1024 Bytes is now one kibibyte, abbreviated 1 KiB. And 1 KB is now exactly 1000 bytes, following the same rule as for any other unit of measurement (SI). I know. But apart from the fact that AFAIK the USA do not follow SI. That KiB/KB mess was created by people with no knowledge of the computer environment. The IEEE no knowledge? >:-) The IEEE is probably fine, but the KiB/KB idea was actually created by
Carlos E. R. wrote: the IEC. I lost track, Did Linda ever get an answer before the thread became a pontificating rant?
I replied [with some further questions relating to her LVM setup] to the original post - so hopefully her mail client placed it before all this noise. :) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:02:19 +0200, "Carlos E. R."
Now that sizes are in the Tera, the difference has become very important.
Which wouldn't be a problem hadn't the manufacturers of hard disks (or rather their marketing) at some point in history suddenly decided that their capacity would look *much* better if defining a kilobyte as 10³ bytes. My suspicion is that it was also them behind the move to create those XiB units.
That would be an exageration, and any way, there is no confussion in the names of the units.
Still, the confusion only started at the above mentioned point in time. And guess what, it's still a minority that actually uses the *iB units. Philipp -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2010-09-03 00:22, Philipp Thomas wrote:
On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:02:19 +0200, "Carlos E. R." <> wrote:
Now that sizes are in the Tera, the difference has become very important.
Which wouldn't be a problem hadn't the manufacturers of hard disks (or rather their marketing) at some point in history suddenly decided that their capacity would look *much* better if defining a kilobyte as 10³ bytes. My suspicion is that it was also them behind the move to create those XiB units.
It is the other way round. There would be no confussion if computer people (like me) never wrecked the mega kilo etc definition, by changing it to their own liking, disregarding proper usage. Kilo is prefix for one thousand, period. You (we) don't like the definition, right: just use another prefix.
That would be an exageration, and any way, there is no confussion in the names of the units.
Still, the confusion only started at the above mentioned point in time. And guess what, it's still a minority that actually uses the *iB units.
The confusion started the moment computer people (like me) started to use kilo = 1024. I'm guilty of that and I repent. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" GM (Elessar)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyALQAACgkQU92UU+smfQUNRwCfYQwNxpu8ZQ4JKaau8qaql4d9 CtwAn01IZU+XqzhHM1C9iPjYtSWKqFDX =QIyE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
El 02/09/10 08:02, Carlos E. R. escribió:
On 2010-09-02 13:26, Philipp Thomas wrote:
* Carlos E. R. (carlos.e.r@opensuse.org) [20100902 12:59]:
Yes, but the name has changed. 1024 Bytes is now one kibibyte, abbreviated 1 KiB. And 1 KB is now exactly 1000 bytes, following the same rule as for any other unit of measurement (SI).
I know. But apart from the fact that AFAIK the USA do not follow SI. That KiB/KB mess was created by people with no knowledge of the computer environment.
The IEEE no knowledge? >:-)
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee that's it. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 15:12 +1000, Basil Chupin wrote:
On 02/09/2010 11:50, Linda Walsh wrote:
I am running low on space in my /backups partition. I looked at the partitions and volumes to see what might be done (besides deleting old backups), and noticed: pvs: PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree /dev/sdb1 Backups lvm2 a- 10.91T 3.15G --- So I thought 'cool', I didn't make it the full size, and I have some left...ok...(I didn't remember what I'd done, its been a while). Run lvresize: lvresize /dev/Backups/Backups -L +3.15G Rounding up size to full physical extent 3.15 GB Extending logical volume Backups to 10.91 TB Logical volume Backups successfully resized I suggest that you look at how the KBs are counted by the manufacturer and then the OS. If I recall correctly, HD mfgrers use something like ~1458 bytes (or something) = 1Kb.
He's talking about PVs and LVs in LVM, so whatever the manufacturer does
is not relevant
--
Adam Tauno Williams
On Thursday 02 September 2010 03:50:47 Linda Walsh wrote:
Ok, now I'm really confused. 10.91T? 14.06T? (Obviously this was optimistic reporting if the partition is only 12TB!)
Where do you get 14.06? Did you read 3.15T instead of 3.15G? 3.15GB = 0.00315TB. 10.91TB + 0.00315TB is eitherl 10.91TB or 10.92TB depending on how rounding goes (is it above 10.915TB?) As for 10.91 vs. 12, the others have already explained KB vs. KiBi, so I won't bother Anders -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 18:50 -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
I am running low on space in my /backups partition. I looked at the partitions and volumes to see what might be done (besides deleting old backups), and noticed: pvs: PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree /dev/sdb1 Backups lvm2 a- 10.91T 3.15G --- So I thought 'cool', I didn't make it the full size, and I have some left...ok...(I didn't remember what I'd done, its been a while). Run lvresize: lvresize /dev/Backups/Backups -L +3.15G Rounding up size to full physical extent 3.15 GB Extending logical volume Backups to 10.91 TB Logical volume Backups successfully resized Um...HELLO? Extending to 10.91? But it was at 10.91!
Your reporting is a bit confusing; what was the original size of the LV?
pvs: PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree /dev/sdb1 Backups lvm2 a- 10.91T 0 Well that was unimpressive.
I don't understand why you are looking at PVs, it is the VG that matters. How much free space does the VG report?
parted /dev/sdb p(rint) Disk /dev/sdb: 12.0TB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: gpt Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 17.4kB 12.0TB 12.0TB backup lvm Ok, now I'm really confused. 10.91T? 14.06T? (Obviously this was optimistic reporting if the partition is only 12TB!)
What does the VG report?
So why does parted show a 12TB disk while lvm shows only a 10.91T disk and why did lvm show 3.15G free when it wasn't really there?
Different counting mechanisms (base-10 vs. base-2) and a little bit of overhead.
How do I get my 1.09T back from lvm? That seems like awfully high for an overhead number for lvm. I'd expect more like "0.09T".
You can't, it isn't there. When using LVM *only* pay attention to the
stats reported by vgdisplay (for the VG). Ignore everything else, it is
just confusing.
--
Adam Tauno Williams
participants (13)
-
Adam Tauno Williams -
Anders Johansson -
Anton Aylward -
Basil Chupin -
Carlos E. R. -
Carlos E. R. -
Cristian Rodríguez -
Dave Howorth -
John Andersen -
Linda Walsh -
Per Jessen -
Philipp Thomas -
Philipp Thomas