SUMMARY 2: Strange "df" readings

From: John Mc Grath (ext_adm!jmcgrath@uunet.UU.NET)
Date: Sat Mar 20 1993 - 04:25:02 CST

In trying to be brief I mistakenly left off the original posting.

----- Begin Included Message -----

>From jmcgrath Mon Mar 15 16:54:13 1993
To: uunet!!sun-managers
Subject: Strange "df" readings

We have a small network of 4 SUN 386i, 4 SPARC IPC and 1
SPARCstation 2. Recently we upgraded the IPCs to SUN OS 4.1.3,
and added a new IPC. All machines were loaded from the same CDROM.
But after looking at the df and du listed below we are slightly
confused. Granted we removed some things like "demo" from ss4, but
we cannot figure how come the numbers are so far different. This
has gotten the department managers attention so I am in a bind to
answer. Any clarification will be appreciated.


{ss5:SUPERUSER:27} df
Filesystem kbytes used avail capacity Mounted on
/dev/sd0a 7573 3599 3217 53% /
/dev/sd0g 147847 121939 11124 92% /usr
/dev/sd0h 3211 22 2868 1% /files

{ss5:SUPERUSER:28} du -s /usr
55378 /usr

Filesystem kbytes used avail capacity Mounted on
/dev/sd0a 7735 3012 3950 43% /
/dev/sd0g 98557 56529 32173 64% /usr
/dev/sd0f 9679 225 8487 3% /var
swap 61800 0 61800 0% /tmp

{ss4:SUPERUSER:18}du -s /usr
56364 /usr

----- End Included Message -----

I received a number of replies suggesting there might be "core" files
or large files in "/usr/tmp". One individual sent a perl script to
check disk usage. This gives me a reason to download perl.
In looking at the way we are mounting things acrossed the network, I
found that we had loaded openwindows from the cdrom and then mounted
openwindows from our server over it. Hence, the "df" saw the actual
disk usage and "du" saw the mount and only counted it as 1 block.

I thank everyone for thier replies. They all gave me good places to

|John J. Mc Grath E-mail: uunet!ext_adm!jmcgrath <uunet only>|
|Exitech South ext_adm!jmcgrath <all others>|
|2245 Avenue G |
|Suite 203 Telephone: (409) 245-9023 <voice> |
|Bay City, Tx. 77414 (409) 245-9038 <modem> |
 If all else fails, you probably weren't meant to do it anyway.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:07:38 CDT