Re: RAID 5: weird size results after Grow

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Corey Hickey wrote:
Marko Berg wrote:
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Marko Berg wrote:
Any suggestions on how to fix this, or what to investigate next, would be appreciated!

I'm not sure what you're trying to "fix" here, everything you posted looks sane.

I'm trying to find the missing 300 GB that, as df reports, are not available. I ought to have a 900 GB array, consisting of four 300 GB devices, while only 600 GB are available. Adding the fourth device didn't increase the capacity of the array (visible, at least). E.g. fdisk reports the array size to be 900 G, but df still claims 600 capacity. Any clues why?

df reports the size of the filesystem, which is still about 600GB--the filesystem doesn't resize automatically when the size of the underlying device changes.

You'll need to use resize2fs, resize_reiserfs, or whatever other tool is appropriate for your type of filesystem.

-Corey

Right, so this isn't one of my sharpest days... Thanks a bunch, Corey!

--
Marko
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux