Subject: Re: du & df
To: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
From: Lars Heidieker <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/12/2001 19:16:05
Yeah you are right just had the wrong situation in mind with the sparse files
At 12:04 AM 11/13/2001 +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:00:42 +0100
> From: Lars Heidieker <email@example.com>
> Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> | Wouln't that be the other way around df showing less in use then du.
>No. That should be impossible (race conditions excepted).
> | I think a bunch of sparse files will cause this.
>An open file (or files) that have been unlinked is the likely cause.
>It also used to be the case (perhaps still is?) that if the filesys was
>mounted with softdeps, and files had been deleted, it would take a while
>for df to catch up (the space isn't actually released to the filesystem
>immediately). On the other hand, du only ever shows the files that are
>currently in directories.
>A third (but very unlikely in this case I suspect) cause can be if some
>other filesystem is mounted on top of the one under consideration, and it
>is almost empty (so du finds little) but there's actually lots of files
>that are now hidden under the mount point (the space is still in use on
>the filesystem, but nothing can get at it - du included).