[Lustre-discuss] Am I missing something?

[Aaron Knister]

The discrepancies between lfs df -h and df -h I think that largely  
have to do with the way GB are calculated. Ether based on 1000 or  
1024. Remember you lose about 5% of each underlying volume due to the  
5% reserved for root.

Aaron

On Feb 12, 2008, at 8:38 AM, Timh Bergström wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Just got a smaller Lustre system running with 1 mdt/mgs and 2 ost's.  
> On the osts i've added 1x10GB disk and 1x20GB disk
>  on each system and formatted and mounted them as /mnt/ost1-4 (ost1)  
> and /mnt/ost2-3 (ost2). I've also mounted the lustre system on the  
> mdt/mgs server with mount -t lustre x.y.n.p at tcp:/testfs /mnt/lustre.  
> So far so good, however df -h only reports 9/60GB avail where lsf df  
> -h reports 54.4G available.
>
> 172.16.x.y at tcp:/testfs
>                        60G   50G  9.0G  85% /mnt/lustre
>
> vs
>
> filesystem summary:      59.1G      4.7G     54.4G    7% /mnt/lustre
>
> --
>
> lustre-client:/mnt/lustre# du -hcs
> 4.0K    .
> 4.0K    total
>
> I cant find anything on this in the lists or manual, but do  you  
> have to have equal size disks to get all the usable space available  
> to the system mounting lustre? Is this somehow connected to stripe- 
> size or some automatic failover settings. My original intent was to  
> create a large storage area using lustre for numerous clients to  
> mount and use as diskspace.
>
> -- 
> Timh Bergström
> System Administrator
> Diino AB - www.diino.com
> :wq _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss

Aaron Knister
Associate Systems Analyst
Center for Ocean-Land-Atmosphere Studies

(301) 595-7000
aaron at iges.org




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss-lustre.org/attachments/20080212/f41b7db3/attachment.htm>