Disk full, du tells different. How to further investigate?du vs. df differenceNo free disk spacegit reports “No space left on device”, but df -h says there is is 2.5G availableRoot volume /dev/mapper/centos-root fullUbuntu thinks disk is full, df says disk usage is at 100% but also says 132G/400G is in useno space on ext4 partition left with files not summing up to used space and with sufficient inodesCentos Server no disk space but df says there is plentyIncorrect Disk space usage in Linux serverCentOS 7 disk spaceCent OS 7.2 Disk (df -h) 100% full but directory size (du -sch /* ) notEmail when Linux server disk is full?rm on a directory with millions of filesHow do you increase a KVM guest's disk space?Linux server's disk fullGot error 28 from storage engine (disk full) but my disk are not fullUbuntu mysql error: Disk is full writingdf vs du. Is my disk really full?calculating days until disk is fullinput/output error at clean ext3 partition - how to check what wrong with data blockWhat's a good choice for a general-purpose “non-advanced” filesystem with Linux R/W and Windows/BSD R/O support?
Disabling quote conversion in docstrings
GitLab account hacked and repo wiped
Why is my arithmetic with a long long int behaving this way?
Would a "Permanence" spell in 5e be overpowered?
As a GM, is it bad form to ask for a moment to think when improvising?
What's the 2-minute timer on mobile Deutsche Bahn tickets?
What is a precise issue with allowing getters?
Where are the "shires" in the UK?
Can full drive backup be used instead of MSSQL database backup?
Why does blending blueberries, milk, banana and vanilla extract cause the mixture to have a yogurty consistency?
All of my Firefox add-ons been disabled suddenly, how can I re-enable them?
Switch Function Not working Properly
Why are oscilloscope input impedances so low?
Is there a closed form, or cleaner way of writing this function?
about academic proof-reading, what to do in this situation?
In linear regression why does regularisation penalise the parameter values as well?
What happens if I accidentally leave an app running and click "Install Now" in Software Updater?
Speed up this NIntegrate
Which "exotic salt" can lower water's freezing point by –70 °C?
Where to draw the line between quantum mechanics theory and its interpretation(s)?
Sci-fi/fantasy book - ships on steel runners skating across ice sheets
Is 'contemporary' ambiguous and if so is there a better word?
Would a small hole in a Faraday cage drastically reduce its effectiveness at blocking interference?
How to display number in triangular pattern with plus sign
Disk full, du tells different. How to further investigate?
du vs. df differenceNo free disk spacegit reports “No space left on device”, but df -h says there is is 2.5G availableRoot volume /dev/mapper/centos-root fullUbuntu thinks disk is full, df says disk usage is at 100% but also says 132G/400G is in useno space on ext4 partition left with files not summing up to used space and with sufficient inodesCentos Server no disk space but df says there is plentyIncorrect Disk space usage in Linux serverCentOS 7 disk spaceCent OS 7.2 Disk (df -h) 100% full but directory size (du -sch /* ) notEmail when Linux server disk is full?rm on a directory with millions of filesHow do you increase a KVM guest's disk space?Linux server's disk fullGot error 28 from storage engine (disk full) but my disk are not fullUbuntu mysql error: Disk is full writingdf vs du. Is my disk really full?calculating days until disk is fullinput/output error at clean ext3 partition - how to check what wrong with data blockWhat's a good choice for a general-purpose “non-advanced” filesystem with Linux R/W and Windows/BSD R/O support?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
I have a SCSI disk in a server (hardware Raid 1), 32G, ext3 filesytem. df
tells me that the disk is 100% full. If I delete 1G this is correctly shown.
However, if I run a du -h -x /
then du
tells me that only 12G are used (I use -x
because of some Samba mounts).
So my question is not about subtle differences between the du and df commands but about how I can find out what causes this huge difference?
I rebooted the machine for a fsck that went w/out errors. Should I run badblocks
? lsof
shows me no open deleted files, lost+found
is empty and there is no obvious warn/err/fail statement in the messages file.
Feel free to ask for further details of the setup.
linux ext3 disk-space-utilization scsi
add a comment |
I have a SCSI disk in a server (hardware Raid 1), 32G, ext3 filesytem. df
tells me that the disk is 100% full. If I delete 1G this is correctly shown.
However, if I run a du -h -x /
then du
tells me that only 12G are used (I use -x
because of some Samba mounts).
So my question is not about subtle differences between the du and df commands but about how I can find out what causes this huge difference?
I rebooted the machine for a fsck that went w/out errors. Should I run badblocks
? lsof
shows me no open deleted files, lost+found
is empty and there is no obvious warn/err/fail statement in the messages file.
Feel free to ask for further details of the setup.
linux ext3 disk-space-utilization scsi
3
This is very close to the question: linux - du vs. df difference (serverfault.com/questions/57098/du-vs-df-difference). The solution was files under a mount point as OldTroll answered.
– Chris Ting
May 30 '11 at 16:45
add a comment |
I have a SCSI disk in a server (hardware Raid 1), 32G, ext3 filesytem. df
tells me that the disk is 100% full. If I delete 1G this is correctly shown.
However, if I run a du -h -x /
then du
tells me that only 12G are used (I use -x
because of some Samba mounts).
So my question is not about subtle differences between the du and df commands but about how I can find out what causes this huge difference?
I rebooted the machine for a fsck that went w/out errors. Should I run badblocks
? lsof
shows me no open deleted files, lost+found
is empty and there is no obvious warn/err/fail statement in the messages file.
Feel free to ask for further details of the setup.
linux ext3 disk-space-utilization scsi
I have a SCSI disk in a server (hardware Raid 1), 32G, ext3 filesytem. df
tells me that the disk is 100% full. If I delete 1G this is correctly shown.
However, if I run a du -h -x /
then du
tells me that only 12G are used (I use -x
because of some Samba mounts).
So my question is not about subtle differences between the du and df commands but about how I can find out what causes this huge difference?
I rebooted the machine for a fsck that went w/out errors. Should I run badblocks
? lsof
shows me no open deleted files, lost+found
is empty and there is no obvious warn/err/fail statement in the messages file.
Feel free to ask for further details of the setup.
linux ext3 disk-space-utilization scsi
linux ext3 disk-space-utilization scsi
asked May 30 '11 at 12:29
initallinitall
99521118
99521118
3
This is very close to the question: linux - du vs. df difference (serverfault.com/questions/57098/du-vs-df-difference). The solution was files under a mount point as OldTroll answered.
– Chris Ting
May 30 '11 at 16:45
add a comment |
3
This is very close to the question: linux - du vs. df difference (serverfault.com/questions/57098/du-vs-df-difference). The solution was files under a mount point as OldTroll answered.
– Chris Ting
May 30 '11 at 16:45
3
3
This is very close to the question: linux - du vs. df difference (serverfault.com/questions/57098/du-vs-df-difference). The solution was files under a mount point as OldTroll answered.
– Chris Ting
May 30 '11 at 16:45
This is very close to the question: linux - du vs. df difference (serverfault.com/questions/57098/du-vs-df-difference). The solution was files under a mount point as OldTroll answered.
– Chris Ting
May 30 '11 at 16:45
add a comment |
17 Answers
17
active
oldest
votes
Check for files on located under mount points. Frequently if you mount a directory (say a sambafs) onto a filesystem that already had a file or directories under it, you lose the ability to see those files, but they're still consuming space on the underlying disk. I've had file copies while in single user mode dump files into directories that I couldn't see except in single usermode (due to other directory systems being mounted on top of them).
1
You can find these hidden files without needing to unmount directories. Take a look at Marcel G's answer below which explains how.
– mhsekhavat
Jul 23 '17 at 7:39
You should show the CLI commands to do this in your answer
– Jonathan
Oct 10 '18 at 17:26
1
DO CHECK even if you think that it does not make sense for you!
– Chris
Oct 26 '18 at 14:32
1
Note: this answer is talking about files located underneath mount points (i.e. hidden on the original filesystem), not within mount points. (Don't be an idiot like me.)
– mwfearnley
Nov 27 '18 at 15:18
add a comment |
Just stumbled on this page when trying to track down an issue on a local server.
In my case the df -h
and du -sh
mismatched by about 50% of the hard disk size.
This was caused by apache (httpd) keeping large log files in memory which had been deleted from disk.
This was tracked down by running lsof | grep "/var" | grep deleted
where /var
was the partition I needed to clean up.
The output showed lines like this:httpd 32617 nobody 106w REG 9,4 1835222944 688166 /var/log/apache/awstats_log (deleted)
The situation was then resolved by restarting apache (service httpd restart
), and cleared up 2gb of disk space, by allowing the locks on deleted files to be cleared.
For me, the locks where not released even after I stopped the program (zombies?). I had tokill -9 'pid'
to release the locks. eg: For your httpd it would have beenkill -9 32617
.
– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:57
5
Minor note: You may have to runlsof
assudo
or not all open file descriptors will show up
– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:34
I ran into this with H2, which was adding several gigs to a logfile every day. Instead of restarting H2 (slow), I usedsudo truncate -s0 /proc/(h2 PID)/(descriptor number obtained from ls /proc/h2pid/fd)
.
– Desty
Sep 26 '16 at 14:57
In my case, even when restarthttpd
space doesn't released. When I ran/etc/init.d/rsyslog restart
it worked :D
– Thanh Nguyen Van
Sep 29 '16 at 1:11
1
You can skip the greps and just dolsof -a +L1 /var
, where-a
means AND all conditions (default is OR),+L1
means list only files with link counts less than 1 (i.e., deleted files with open file descriptors), and/var
constrains to files under that mount point
– kbolino
May 13 '18 at 2:50
|
show 3 more comments
I agree with OldTroll's answer as the most probable cause for your "missing" space.
On Linux you can easily remount the whole root partition (or any other partition for that matter) to another place in you filesystem say /mnt for example, just issue a
mount -o bind / /mnt
then you can do a
du -h /mnt
and see what uses up your space.
Ps: sorry for adding a new answer and not a comment but I needed some formatting for this post to be readable.
3
Thanks so much for this tip. Allowed me to find and delete my large, "hidden" files without downtime!
– choover
Feb 28 '13 at 13:47
Thanks - this showed that docker was filling up my hard drive with diffs in/var/lib/docker/aufs/diff/
– naught101
Aug 5 '15 at 3:29
add a comment |
See what df -i
says. It could be that you are out of inodes, which might happen if there are a large number of small files in that filesystem, which uses up all the available inodes without consuming all the available space.
1
The size of a file and the amount of space it takes on a filesystem are two separate things. The smaller the files tend to be, the bigger the discrepancy between them. If you write a script that sums up the sizes of files and compare it to thedu -s
of the same subtree, you're going to get a good idea if that's the case here.
– Marcin
May 30 '11 at 15:00
add a comment |
In my case this had to do with large deleted files. It was fairly painful to solve before I found this page, which set me on the correct path.
I finally solved the problem by using lsof | grep deleted
, which showed me which program was holding two very large log files (totalling 5GB of my available 8GB root partition).
1
This answer makes me wonder why you are storing log files on the root partition, especially one that small... but to each their own, I suppose...
– a CVn
Nov 14 '14 at 18:47
I had a similar issue , I had restarted all the applications that were using the deleted file , I guess there was a zombie process still holding on to a large deleted file
– user1965449
Dec 15 '15 at 2:37
This was the case for us, a log processing linux app known as filebeat kept files open.
– Pykler
Dec 7 '16 at 20:53
@Pykler For us it was filebeat as well. Thanks for the tip!
– Martijn Heemels
Jan 29 at 9:30
add a comment |
Files that are open by a program do not actually go away (stop consuming disk space) when you delete them, they go away when the program closes them. A program might have a huge temporary file that you (and du) can't see. If it's a zombie program, you might need to reboot to clear those files.
OP said he'd rebooted the system and the problem persisted.
– OldTroll
May 30 '11 at 12:58
I had zombies that wouldn't release the locks on the files, Ikill -9 'pid'
them to release the locks and get the disk space back.
– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:58
add a comment |
Try this to see if a dead/hung process is locked while still writing to the disk:
lsof | grep "/mnt"
Then try killing off any PIDs which are stuck (especially look for lines ending in "(deleted"))
Thanks! I was able to find that the SFTP server process was holding the deleted file
– lyomi
Aug 30 '13 at 4:43
add a comment |
This is the easiest method I have found to date to find large files!
Here is a example if your root mount is full / (mount /root)
Example:
cd / (so you are in root)
ls | xargs du -hs
Example Output:
9.4M bin
63M boot
4.0K cgroup
680K dev
31M etc
6.3G home
313M lib
32M lib64
16K lost+found
61G media
4.0K mnt
113M opt
du: cannot access `proc/6102/task/6102/fd/4': No such file or directory
0 proc
19M root
840K run
19M sbin
4.0K selinux
4.0K srv
25G store
26M tmp
then you would notice that store is large do a
cd /store
and run again
ls | xargs du -hs
Example output:
109M backup
358M fnb
4.0G iso
8.0K ks
16K lost+found
47M root
11M scripts
79M tmp
21G vms
in this case the vms directory is the space hog.
1
Why not using simpler tools likebaobab
? (see marzocca.net/linux/baobab/baobab-getting-started.html)
– Yvan
May 5 '15 at 7:11
2
Hmls
+xargs
seems like overkill,du -sh /*
works just fine by itself
– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:35
1
if you don't know about ncdu ... you'll thank me later: dev.yorhel.nl/ncdu
– Troy Folger
Dec 5 '16 at 22:56
add a comment |
For me, I needed to run sudo du
as there were a large amount of docker files under /var/lib/docker
that a non-sudo user doesn't have permission to read.
This was my problem. I forgot I switched storage systems in docker and the old volumes were still hanging around.
– Richard Nienaber
Jan 9 at 9:21
add a comment |
So I had this problem in Centos 7 as well and found a solution after trying a bunch of stuff like bleachbit and cleaning /usr and /var even though they only showed about 7G each. Was still showing 50G of 50G used in the root partition but only showed 9G of file usage. Ran a live ubuntu cd and unmounted the offending 50G partition, opened terminal and ran xfs_check and xfs_repair on the partition. I then remounted the partition and my lost+found directory had expanded to 40G. Sorted the lost+found by size and found a 38G text log file for steam that eventualy just repeated a mp3 error. Removed the large file and now have space and my disks usage agrees with my root partition size. I would still like to know how to get the steam log to not grow so big again.
Did this happen to you at work? serverfault.com/help/on-topic
– chicks
May 4 '17 at 20:37
No just on my home computer.
– Justin Chadwick
May 6 '17 at 2:57
3
xfs_fsr
fixed this issue for us
– Druska
Aug 17 '17 at 18:34
add a comment |
if the mounted disk is a shared folder on a windows machine, then it seems that df will show the size and disk use of the entire windows disk, but du will show only the part of the disk that you have access too. (and is mounted). so in this case the problem must be fixed on the windows machine.
add a comment |
One more possibility to consider - you are almost guaranteed to see a big discrepancy if you are using docker, and you run df/du inside a container that is using volume mounts. In the case of a directory mounted to a volume on the docker host, df will report the HOST's df totals. This is obvious if you think about it, but when you get a report of a "runaway container filling the disk!", make sure you verify the container's filespace consumption with something like du -hs <dir>
.
add a comment |
A similar thing happened to us in production, disk usage went to 98%. Did the following investigation :
a) df -i
for checking the inode usage, inode usage was 6% so not much smaller files
b) Mounting root
and checking hidden files. Could not file any extra files. du
results were same as before mount.
c) Finally, checked nginx
logs. It was configured to write to disk but a developer deleted the log file directly causing nginx
to keep all the logs in-memory. As the file /var/log/nginx/access.log
was deleted from disk using rm
it was not visible using du
but the file was getting accessed by nginx
and hence it was still held open
add a comment |
I had the same problem that is mentioned in this topic, but in one VPS.
So I have tested everything that is described in this topic but without success.
The solution was a contact for support with our VPS provider who performed a quota recalculation and corrected the space difference of df -h
and du-sh /
.
add a comment |
I ran into this problem on a FreeBSD box today. The issue was that it was an artifact of vi
(not vim
, not sure if vim
would create this problem). The file was consuming space but hadn't fully been written to disk.
You can check that with:
$ fstat -f /path/to/mount/point |sort -nk8 |tail
This looks at all open files and sorts (numerically via -n
) by the 8th column (key, -k8
), showing the last ten items.
In my case, the final (largest) entry looked like this:
bob vi 12345 4 /var 97267 -rwx------ 1569454080 rw
This meant process (PID) 12345 was consuming 1.46G (the eighth column divided by 1024³) of disk despite the lack of du
noticing it. vi
is horrible at viewing extremely large files; even 100MB is large for it. 1.5G (or however large that file actually was) is ridiculous.
The solution was to sudo kill -HUP 12345
(if that didn't work, I'd sudo kill 12345
and if that also fails, the dreaded kill -9
would come into play).
Avoid text editors on large files. Sample workarounds for quick skimming:
Assuming reasonable line lengths:
head -n1000 big.log; tail -n1000 big.log |vim -R -
wc -l big.log |awk -v n=2000 'NR==FNRL=$1;nextFNR%int(L/n)==1' - big.log |vim -R -
Assuming unreasonably large line(s):
head -c8000 big.log; tail -c8000 big.log |vim -R -
These use vim -R
in place of view
because vim
is nearly always better ... when it's installed. Feel free to pipe them into view
or vi -R
instead.
If you're opening such a large file to actually edit it, consider sed
or awk
or some other programmatic approach.
add a comment |
check if your server have ossec agent installed. Or some proccess is using the deleted log files. In my a time ago was ossec agent.
1
OP mentioned that the machine was rebooted, so there should be no deleted files left.
– RalfFriedl
Mar 5 at 18:06
add a comment |
check the /lost+found, I had a system (centos 7) and some of file in the /lost+found ate up all the space.
How would this account for the difference in reported disk usage as described in the question?
– roaima
Nov 30 '16 at 23:36
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "2"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f275206%2fdisk-full-du-tells-different-how-to-further-investigate%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
17 Answers
17
active
oldest
votes
17 Answers
17
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Check for files on located under mount points. Frequently if you mount a directory (say a sambafs) onto a filesystem that already had a file or directories under it, you lose the ability to see those files, but they're still consuming space on the underlying disk. I've had file copies while in single user mode dump files into directories that I couldn't see except in single usermode (due to other directory systems being mounted on top of them).
1
You can find these hidden files without needing to unmount directories. Take a look at Marcel G's answer below which explains how.
– mhsekhavat
Jul 23 '17 at 7:39
You should show the CLI commands to do this in your answer
– Jonathan
Oct 10 '18 at 17:26
1
DO CHECK even if you think that it does not make sense for you!
– Chris
Oct 26 '18 at 14:32
1
Note: this answer is talking about files located underneath mount points (i.e. hidden on the original filesystem), not within mount points. (Don't be an idiot like me.)
– mwfearnley
Nov 27 '18 at 15:18
add a comment |
Check for files on located under mount points. Frequently if you mount a directory (say a sambafs) onto a filesystem that already had a file or directories under it, you lose the ability to see those files, but they're still consuming space on the underlying disk. I've had file copies while in single user mode dump files into directories that I couldn't see except in single usermode (due to other directory systems being mounted on top of them).
1
You can find these hidden files without needing to unmount directories. Take a look at Marcel G's answer below which explains how.
– mhsekhavat
Jul 23 '17 at 7:39
You should show the CLI commands to do this in your answer
– Jonathan
Oct 10 '18 at 17:26
1
DO CHECK even if you think that it does not make sense for you!
– Chris
Oct 26 '18 at 14:32
1
Note: this answer is talking about files located underneath mount points (i.e. hidden on the original filesystem), not within mount points. (Don't be an idiot like me.)
– mwfearnley
Nov 27 '18 at 15:18
add a comment |
Check for files on located under mount points. Frequently if you mount a directory (say a sambafs) onto a filesystem that already had a file or directories under it, you lose the ability to see those files, but they're still consuming space on the underlying disk. I've had file copies while in single user mode dump files into directories that I couldn't see except in single usermode (due to other directory systems being mounted on top of them).
Check for files on located under mount points. Frequently if you mount a directory (say a sambafs) onto a filesystem that already had a file or directories under it, you lose the ability to see those files, but they're still consuming space on the underlying disk. I've had file copies while in single user mode dump files into directories that I couldn't see except in single usermode (due to other directory systems being mounted on top of them).
answered May 30 '11 at 12:35
OldTrollOldTroll
1,2611018
1,2611018
1
You can find these hidden files without needing to unmount directories. Take a look at Marcel G's answer below which explains how.
– mhsekhavat
Jul 23 '17 at 7:39
You should show the CLI commands to do this in your answer
– Jonathan
Oct 10 '18 at 17:26
1
DO CHECK even if you think that it does not make sense for you!
– Chris
Oct 26 '18 at 14:32
1
Note: this answer is talking about files located underneath mount points (i.e. hidden on the original filesystem), not within mount points. (Don't be an idiot like me.)
– mwfearnley
Nov 27 '18 at 15:18
add a comment |
1
You can find these hidden files without needing to unmount directories. Take a look at Marcel G's answer below which explains how.
– mhsekhavat
Jul 23 '17 at 7:39
You should show the CLI commands to do this in your answer
– Jonathan
Oct 10 '18 at 17:26
1
DO CHECK even if you think that it does not make sense for you!
– Chris
Oct 26 '18 at 14:32
1
Note: this answer is talking about files located underneath mount points (i.e. hidden on the original filesystem), not within mount points. (Don't be an idiot like me.)
– mwfearnley
Nov 27 '18 at 15:18
1
1
You can find these hidden files without needing to unmount directories. Take a look at Marcel G's answer below which explains how.
– mhsekhavat
Jul 23 '17 at 7:39
You can find these hidden files without needing to unmount directories. Take a look at Marcel G's answer below which explains how.
– mhsekhavat
Jul 23 '17 at 7:39
You should show the CLI commands to do this in your answer
– Jonathan
Oct 10 '18 at 17:26
You should show the CLI commands to do this in your answer
– Jonathan
Oct 10 '18 at 17:26
1
1
DO CHECK even if you think that it does not make sense for you!
– Chris
Oct 26 '18 at 14:32
DO CHECK even if you think that it does not make sense for you!
– Chris
Oct 26 '18 at 14:32
1
1
Note: this answer is talking about files located underneath mount points (i.e. hidden on the original filesystem), not within mount points. (Don't be an idiot like me.)
– mwfearnley
Nov 27 '18 at 15:18
Note: this answer is talking about files located underneath mount points (i.e. hidden on the original filesystem), not within mount points. (Don't be an idiot like me.)
– mwfearnley
Nov 27 '18 at 15:18
add a comment |
Just stumbled on this page when trying to track down an issue on a local server.
In my case the df -h
and du -sh
mismatched by about 50% of the hard disk size.
This was caused by apache (httpd) keeping large log files in memory which had been deleted from disk.
This was tracked down by running lsof | grep "/var" | grep deleted
where /var
was the partition I needed to clean up.
The output showed lines like this:httpd 32617 nobody 106w REG 9,4 1835222944 688166 /var/log/apache/awstats_log (deleted)
The situation was then resolved by restarting apache (service httpd restart
), and cleared up 2gb of disk space, by allowing the locks on deleted files to be cleared.
For me, the locks where not released even after I stopped the program (zombies?). I had tokill -9 'pid'
to release the locks. eg: For your httpd it would have beenkill -9 32617
.
– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:57
5
Minor note: You may have to runlsof
assudo
or not all open file descriptors will show up
– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:34
I ran into this with H2, which was adding several gigs to a logfile every day. Instead of restarting H2 (slow), I usedsudo truncate -s0 /proc/(h2 PID)/(descriptor number obtained from ls /proc/h2pid/fd)
.
– Desty
Sep 26 '16 at 14:57
In my case, even when restarthttpd
space doesn't released. When I ran/etc/init.d/rsyslog restart
it worked :D
– Thanh Nguyen Van
Sep 29 '16 at 1:11
1
You can skip the greps and just dolsof -a +L1 /var
, where-a
means AND all conditions (default is OR),+L1
means list only files with link counts less than 1 (i.e., deleted files with open file descriptors), and/var
constrains to files under that mount point
– kbolino
May 13 '18 at 2:50
|
show 3 more comments
Just stumbled on this page when trying to track down an issue on a local server.
In my case the df -h
and du -sh
mismatched by about 50% of the hard disk size.
This was caused by apache (httpd) keeping large log files in memory which had been deleted from disk.
This was tracked down by running lsof | grep "/var" | grep deleted
where /var
was the partition I needed to clean up.
The output showed lines like this:httpd 32617 nobody 106w REG 9,4 1835222944 688166 /var/log/apache/awstats_log (deleted)
The situation was then resolved by restarting apache (service httpd restart
), and cleared up 2gb of disk space, by allowing the locks on deleted files to be cleared.
For me, the locks where not released even after I stopped the program (zombies?). I had tokill -9 'pid'
to release the locks. eg: For your httpd it would have beenkill -9 32617
.
– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:57
5
Minor note: You may have to runlsof
assudo
or not all open file descriptors will show up
– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:34
I ran into this with H2, which was adding several gigs to a logfile every day. Instead of restarting H2 (slow), I usedsudo truncate -s0 /proc/(h2 PID)/(descriptor number obtained from ls /proc/h2pid/fd)
.
– Desty
Sep 26 '16 at 14:57
In my case, even when restarthttpd
space doesn't released. When I ran/etc/init.d/rsyslog restart
it worked :D
– Thanh Nguyen Van
Sep 29 '16 at 1:11
1
You can skip the greps and just dolsof -a +L1 /var
, where-a
means AND all conditions (default is OR),+L1
means list only files with link counts less than 1 (i.e., deleted files with open file descriptors), and/var
constrains to files under that mount point
– kbolino
May 13 '18 at 2:50
|
show 3 more comments
Just stumbled on this page when trying to track down an issue on a local server.
In my case the df -h
and du -sh
mismatched by about 50% of the hard disk size.
This was caused by apache (httpd) keeping large log files in memory which had been deleted from disk.
This was tracked down by running lsof | grep "/var" | grep deleted
where /var
was the partition I needed to clean up.
The output showed lines like this:httpd 32617 nobody 106w REG 9,4 1835222944 688166 /var/log/apache/awstats_log (deleted)
The situation was then resolved by restarting apache (service httpd restart
), and cleared up 2gb of disk space, by allowing the locks on deleted files to be cleared.
Just stumbled on this page when trying to track down an issue on a local server.
In my case the df -h
and du -sh
mismatched by about 50% of the hard disk size.
This was caused by apache (httpd) keeping large log files in memory which had been deleted from disk.
This was tracked down by running lsof | grep "/var" | grep deleted
where /var
was the partition I needed to clean up.
The output showed lines like this:httpd 32617 nobody 106w REG 9,4 1835222944 688166 /var/log/apache/awstats_log (deleted)
The situation was then resolved by restarting apache (service httpd restart
), and cleared up 2gb of disk space, by allowing the locks on deleted files to be cleared.
edited Feb 15 at 10:29
DDS
1208
1208
answered Mar 12 '14 at 11:10
KHobbitsKHobbits
86162
86162
For me, the locks where not released even after I stopped the program (zombies?). I had tokill -9 'pid'
to release the locks. eg: For your httpd it would have beenkill -9 32617
.
– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:57
5
Minor note: You may have to runlsof
assudo
or not all open file descriptors will show up
– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:34
I ran into this with H2, which was adding several gigs to a logfile every day. Instead of restarting H2 (slow), I usedsudo truncate -s0 /proc/(h2 PID)/(descriptor number obtained from ls /proc/h2pid/fd)
.
– Desty
Sep 26 '16 at 14:57
In my case, even when restarthttpd
space doesn't released. When I ran/etc/init.d/rsyslog restart
it worked :D
– Thanh Nguyen Van
Sep 29 '16 at 1:11
1
You can skip the greps and just dolsof -a +L1 /var
, where-a
means AND all conditions (default is OR),+L1
means list only files with link counts less than 1 (i.e., deleted files with open file descriptors), and/var
constrains to files under that mount point
– kbolino
May 13 '18 at 2:50
|
show 3 more comments
For me, the locks where not released even after I stopped the program (zombies?). I had tokill -9 'pid'
to release the locks. eg: For your httpd it would have beenkill -9 32617
.
– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:57
5
Minor note: You may have to runlsof
assudo
or not all open file descriptors will show up
– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:34
I ran into this with H2, which was adding several gigs to a logfile every day. Instead of restarting H2 (slow), I usedsudo truncate -s0 /proc/(h2 PID)/(descriptor number obtained from ls /proc/h2pid/fd)
.
– Desty
Sep 26 '16 at 14:57
In my case, even when restarthttpd
space doesn't released. When I ran/etc/init.d/rsyslog restart
it worked :D
– Thanh Nguyen Van
Sep 29 '16 at 1:11
1
You can skip the greps and just dolsof -a +L1 /var
, where-a
means AND all conditions (default is OR),+L1
means list only files with link counts less than 1 (i.e., deleted files with open file descriptors), and/var
constrains to files under that mount point
– kbolino
May 13 '18 at 2:50
For me, the locks where not released even after I stopped the program (zombies?). I had to
kill -9 'pid'
to release the locks. eg: For your httpd it would have been kill -9 32617
.– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:57
For me, the locks where not released even after I stopped the program (zombies?). I had to
kill -9 'pid'
to release the locks. eg: For your httpd it would have been kill -9 32617
.– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:57
5
5
Minor note: You may have to run
lsof
as sudo
or not all open file descriptors will show up– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:34
Minor note: You may have to run
lsof
as sudo
or not all open file descriptors will show up– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:34
I ran into this with H2, which was adding several gigs to a logfile every day. Instead of restarting H2 (slow), I used
sudo truncate -s0 /proc/(h2 PID)/(descriptor number obtained from ls /proc/h2pid/fd)
.– Desty
Sep 26 '16 at 14:57
I ran into this with H2, which was adding several gigs to a logfile every day. Instead of restarting H2 (slow), I used
sudo truncate -s0 /proc/(h2 PID)/(descriptor number obtained from ls /proc/h2pid/fd)
.– Desty
Sep 26 '16 at 14:57
In my case, even when restart
httpd
space doesn't released. When I ran /etc/init.d/rsyslog restart
it worked :D– Thanh Nguyen Van
Sep 29 '16 at 1:11
In my case, even when restart
httpd
space doesn't released. When I ran /etc/init.d/rsyslog restart
it worked :D– Thanh Nguyen Van
Sep 29 '16 at 1:11
1
1
You can skip the greps and just do
lsof -a +L1 /var
, where -a
means AND all conditions (default is OR), +L1
means list only files with link counts less than 1 (i.e., deleted files with open file descriptors), and /var
constrains to files under that mount point– kbolino
May 13 '18 at 2:50
You can skip the greps and just do
lsof -a +L1 /var
, where -a
means AND all conditions (default is OR), +L1
means list only files with link counts less than 1 (i.e., deleted files with open file descriptors), and /var
constrains to files under that mount point– kbolino
May 13 '18 at 2:50
|
show 3 more comments
I agree with OldTroll's answer as the most probable cause for your "missing" space.
On Linux you can easily remount the whole root partition (or any other partition for that matter) to another place in you filesystem say /mnt for example, just issue a
mount -o bind / /mnt
then you can do a
du -h /mnt
and see what uses up your space.
Ps: sorry for adding a new answer and not a comment but I needed some formatting for this post to be readable.
3
Thanks so much for this tip. Allowed me to find and delete my large, "hidden" files without downtime!
– choover
Feb 28 '13 at 13:47
Thanks - this showed that docker was filling up my hard drive with diffs in/var/lib/docker/aufs/diff/
– naught101
Aug 5 '15 at 3:29
add a comment |
I agree with OldTroll's answer as the most probable cause for your "missing" space.
On Linux you can easily remount the whole root partition (or any other partition for that matter) to another place in you filesystem say /mnt for example, just issue a
mount -o bind / /mnt
then you can do a
du -h /mnt
and see what uses up your space.
Ps: sorry for adding a new answer and not a comment but I needed some formatting for this post to be readable.
3
Thanks so much for this tip. Allowed me to find and delete my large, "hidden" files without downtime!
– choover
Feb 28 '13 at 13:47
Thanks - this showed that docker was filling up my hard drive with diffs in/var/lib/docker/aufs/diff/
– naught101
Aug 5 '15 at 3:29
add a comment |
I agree with OldTroll's answer as the most probable cause for your "missing" space.
On Linux you can easily remount the whole root partition (or any other partition for that matter) to another place in you filesystem say /mnt for example, just issue a
mount -o bind / /mnt
then you can do a
du -h /mnt
and see what uses up your space.
Ps: sorry for adding a new answer and not a comment but I needed some formatting for this post to be readable.
I agree with OldTroll's answer as the most probable cause for your "missing" space.
On Linux you can easily remount the whole root partition (or any other partition for that matter) to another place in you filesystem say /mnt for example, just issue a
mount -o bind / /mnt
then you can do a
du -h /mnt
and see what uses up your space.
Ps: sorry for adding a new answer and not a comment but I needed some formatting for this post to be readable.
answered May 30 '11 at 13:54
Marcel GMarcel G
1,6791123
1,6791123
3
Thanks so much for this tip. Allowed me to find and delete my large, "hidden" files without downtime!
– choover
Feb 28 '13 at 13:47
Thanks - this showed that docker was filling up my hard drive with diffs in/var/lib/docker/aufs/diff/
– naught101
Aug 5 '15 at 3:29
add a comment |
3
Thanks so much for this tip. Allowed me to find and delete my large, "hidden" files without downtime!
– choover
Feb 28 '13 at 13:47
Thanks - this showed that docker was filling up my hard drive with diffs in/var/lib/docker/aufs/diff/
– naught101
Aug 5 '15 at 3:29
3
3
Thanks so much for this tip. Allowed me to find and delete my large, "hidden" files without downtime!
– choover
Feb 28 '13 at 13:47
Thanks so much for this tip. Allowed me to find and delete my large, "hidden" files without downtime!
– choover
Feb 28 '13 at 13:47
Thanks - this showed that docker was filling up my hard drive with diffs in
/var/lib/docker/aufs/diff/
– naught101
Aug 5 '15 at 3:29
Thanks - this showed that docker was filling up my hard drive with diffs in
/var/lib/docker/aufs/diff/
– naught101
Aug 5 '15 at 3:29
add a comment |
See what df -i
says. It could be that you are out of inodes, which might happen if there are a large number of small files in that filesystem, which uses up all the available inodes without consuming all the available space.
1
The size of a file and the amount of space it takes on a filesystem are two separate things. The smaller the files tend to be, the bigger the discrepancy between them. If you write a script that sums up the sizes of files and compare it to thedu -s
of the same subtree, you're going to get a good idea if that's the case here.
– Marcin
May 30 '11 at 15:00
add a comment |
See what df -i
says. It could be that you are out of inodes, which might happen if there are a large number of small files in that filesystem, which uses up all the available inodes without consuming all the available space.
1
The size of a file and the amount of space it takes on a filesystem are two separate things. The smaller the files tend to be, the bigger the discrepancy between them. If you write a script that sums up the sizes of files and compare it to thedu -s
of the same subtree, you're going to get a good idea if that's the case here.
– Marcin
May 30 '11 at 15:00
add a comment |
See what df -i
says. It could be that you are out of inodes, which might happen if there are a large number of small files in that filesystem, which uses up all the available inodes without consuming all the available space.
See what df -i
says. It could be that you are out of inodes, which might happen if there are a large number of small files in that filesystem, which uses up all the available inodes without consuming all the available space.
edited Dec 15 '15 at 8:17
HBruijn
57.4k1190153
57.4k1190153
answered May 30 '11 at 14:10
eirescoteirescot
48428
48428
1
The size of a file and the amount of space it takes on a filesystem are two separate things. The smaller the files tend to be, the bigger the discrepancy between them. If you write a script that sums up the sizes of files and compare it to thedu -s
of the same subtree, you're going to get a good idea if that's the case here.
– Marcin
May 30 '11 at 15:00
add a comment |
1
The size of a file and the amount of space it takes on a filesystem are two separate things. The smaller the files tend to be, the bigger the discrepancy between them. If you write a script that sums up the sizes of files and compare it to thedu -s
of the same subtree, you're going to get a good idea if that's the case here.
– Marcin
May 30 '11 at 15:00
1
1
The size of a file and the amount of space it takes on a filesystem are two separate things. The smaller the files tend to be, the bigger the discrepancy between them. If you write a script that sums up the sizes of files and compare it to the
du -s
of the same subtree, you're going to get a good idea if that's the case here.– Marcin
May 30 '11 at 15:00
The size of a file and the amount of space it takes on a filesystem are two separate things. The smaller the files tend to be, the bigger the discrepancy between them. If you write a script that sums up the sizes of files and compare it to the
du -s
of the same subtree, you're going to get a good idea if that's the case here.– Marcin
May 30 '11 at 15:00
add a comment |
In my case this had to do with large deleted files. It was fairly painful to solve before I found this page, which set me on the correct path.
I finally solved the problem by using lsof | grep deleted
, which showed me which program was holding two very large log files (totalling 5GB of my available 8GB root partition).
1
This answer makes me wonder why you are storing log files on the root partition, especially one that small... but to each their own, I suppose...
– a CVn
Nov 14 '14 at 18:47
I had a similar issue , I had restarted all the applications that were using the deleted file , I guess there was a zombie process still holding on to a large deleted file
– user1965449
Dec 15 '15 at 2:37
This was the case for us, a log processing linux app known as filebeat kept files open.
– Pykler
Dec 7 '16 at 20:53
@Pykler For us it was filebeat as well. Thanks for the tip!
– Martijn Heemels
Jan 29 at 9:30
add a comment |
In my case this had to do with large deleted files. It was fairly painful to solve before I found this page, which set me on the correct path.
I finally solved the problem by using lsof | grep deleted
, which showed me which program was holding two very large log files (totalling 5GB of my available 8GB root partition).
1
This answer makes me wonder why you are storing log files on the root partition, especially one that small... but to each their own, I suppose...
– a CVn
Nov 14 '14 at 18:47
I had a similar issue , I had restarted all the applications that were using the deleted file , I guess there was a zombie process still holding on to a large deleted file
– user1965449
Dec 15 '15 at 2:37
This was the case for us, a log processing linux app known as filebeat kept files open.
– Pykler
Dec 7 '16 at 20:53
@Pykler For us it was filebeat as well. Thanks for the tip!
– Martijn Heemels
Jan 29 at 9:30
add a comment |
In my case this had to do with large deleted files. It was fairly painful to solve before I found this page, which set me on the correct path.
I finally solved the problem by using lsof | grep deleted
, which showed me which program was holding two very large log files (totalling 5GB of my available 8GB root partition).
In my case this had to do with large deleted files. It was fairly painful to solve before I found this page, which set me on the correct path.
I finally solved the problem by using lsof | grep deleted
, which showed me which program was holding two very large log files (totalling 5GB of my available 8GB root partition).
edited Nov 14 '14 at 19:44
a CVn
3,2522155
3,2522155
answered Nov 14 '14 at 18:15
AdrianAdrian
19112
19112
1
This answer makes me wonder why you are storing log files on the root partition, especially one that small... but to each their own, I suppose...
– a CVn
Nov 14 '14 at 18:47
I had a similar issue , I had restarted all the applications that were using the deleted file , I guess there was a zombie process still holding on to a large deleted file
– user1965449
Dec 15 '15 at 2:37
This was the case for us, a log processing linux app known as filebeat kept files open.
– Pykler
Dec 7 '16 at 20:53
@Pykler For us it was filebeat as well. Thanks for the tip!
– Martijn Heemels
Jan 29 at 9:30
add a comment |
1
This answer makes me wonder why you are storing log files on the root partition, especially one that small... but to each their own, I suppose...
– a CVn
Nov 14 '14 at 18:47
I had a similar issue , I had restarted all the applications that were using the deleted file , I guess there was a zombie process still holding on to a large deleted file
– user1965449
Dec 15 '15 at 2:37
This was the case for us, a log processing linux app known as filebeat kept files open.
– Pykler
Dec 7 '16 at 20:53
@Pykler For us it was filebeat as well. Thanks for the tip!
– Martijn Heemels
Jan 29 at 9:30
1
1
This answer makes me wonder why you are storing log files on the root partition, especially one that small... but to each their own, I suppose...
– a CVn
Nov 14 '14 at 18:47
This answer makes me wonder why you are storing log files on the root partition, especially one that small... but to each their own, I suppose...
– a CVn
Nov 14 '14 at 18:47
I had a similar issue , I had restarted all the applications that were using the deleted file , I guess there was a zombie process still holding on to a large deleted file
– user1965449
Dec 15 '15 at 2:37
I had a similar issue , I had restarted all the applications that were using the deleted file , I guess there was a zombie process still holding on to a large deleted file
– user1965449
Dec 15 '15 at 2:37
This was the case for us, a log processing linux app known as filebeat kept files open.
– Pykler
Dec 7 '16 at 20:53
This was the case for us, a log processing linux app known as filebeat kept files open.
– Pykler
Dec 7 '16 at 20:53
@Pykler For us it was filebeat as well. Thanks for the tip!
– Martijn Heemels
Jan 29 at 9:30
@Pykler For us it was filebeat as well. Thanks for the tip!
– Martijn Heemels
Jan 29 at 9:30
add a comment |
Files that are open by a program do not actually go away (stop consuming disk space) when you delete them, they go away when the program closes them. A program might have a huge temporary file that you (and du) can't see. If it's a zombie program, you might need to reboot to clear those files.
OP said he'd rebooted the system and the problem persisted.
– OldTroll
May 30 '11 at 12:58
I had zombies that wouldn't release the locks on the files, Ikill -9 'pid'
them to release the locks and get the disk space back.
– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:58
add a comment |
Files that are open by a program do not actually go away (stop consuming disk space) when you delete them, they go away when the program closes them. A program might have a huge temporary file that you (and du) can't see. If it's a zombie program, you might need to reboot to clear those files.
OP said he'd rebooted the system and the problem persisted.
– OldTroll
May 30 '11 at 12:58
I had zombies that wouldn't release the locks on the files, Ikill -9 'pid'
them to release the locks and get the disk space back.
– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:58
add a comment |
Files that are open by a program do not actually go away (stop consuming disk space) when you delete them, they go away when the program closes them. A program might have a huge temporary file that you (and du) can't see. If it's a zombie program, you might need to reboot to clear those files.
Files that are open by a program do not actually go away (stop consuming disk space) when you delete them, they go away when the program closes them. A program might have a huge temporary file that you (and du) can't see. If it's a zombie program, you might need to reboot to clear those files.
answered May 30 '11 at 12:51
Paul TomblinPaul Tomblin
4,77412439
4,77412439
OP said he'd rebooted the system and the problem persisted.
– OldTroll
May 30 '11 at 12:58
I had zombies that wouldn't release the locks on the files, Ikill -9 'pid'
them to release the locks and get the disk space back.
– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:58
add a comment |
OP said he'd rebooted the system and the problem persisted.
– OldTroll
May 30 '11 at 12:58
I had zombies that wouldn't release the locks on the files, Ikill -9 'pid'
them to release the locks and get the disk space back.
– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:58
OP said he'd rebooted the system and the problem persisted.
– OldTroll
May 30 '11 at 12:58
OP said he'd rebooted the system and the problem persisted.
– OldTroll
May 30 '11 at 12:58
I had zombies that wouldn't release the locks on the files, I
kill -9 'pid'
them to release the locks and get the disk space back.– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:58
I had zombies that wouldn't release the locks on the files, I
kill -9 'pid'
them to release the locks and get the disk space back.– Micka
Jun 17 '15 at 8:58
add a comment |
Try this to see if a dead/hung process is locked while still writing to the disk:
lsof | grep "/mnt"
Then try killing off any PIDs which are stuck (especially look for lines ending in "(deleted"))
Thanks! I was able to find that the SFTP server process was holding the deleted file
– lyomi
Aug 30 '13 at 4:43
add a comment |
Try this to see if a dead/hung process is locked while still writing to the disk:
lsof | grep "/mnt"
Then try killing off any PIDs which are stuck (especially look for lines ending in "(deleted"))
Thanks! I was able to find that the SFTP server process was holding the deleted file
– lyomi
Aug 30 '13 at 4:43
add a comment |
Try this to see if a dead/hung process is locked while still writing to the disk:
lsof | grep "/mnt"
Then try killing off any PIDs which are stuck (especially look for lines ending in "(deleted"))
Try this to see if a dead/hung process is locked while still writing to the disk:
lsof | grep "/mnt"
Then try killing off any PIDs which are stuck (especially look for lines ending in "(deleted"))
answered Jun 26 '11 at 10:38
PhirskPhirsk
411
411
Thanks! I was able to find that the SFTP server process was holding the deleted file
– lyomi
Aug 30 '13 at 4:43
add a comment |
Thanks! I was able to find that the SFTP server process was holding the deleted file
– lyomi
Aug 30 '13 at 4:43
Thanks! I was able to find that the SFTP server process was holding the deleted file
– lyomi
Aug 30 '13 at 4:43
Thanks! I was able to find that the SFTP server process was holding the deleted file
– lyomi
Aug 30 '13 at 4:43
add a comment |
This is the easiest method I have found to date to find large files!
Here is a example if your root mount is full / (mount /root)
Example:
cd / (so you are in root)
ls | xargs du -hs
Example Output:
9.4M bin
63M boot
4.0K cgroup
680K dev
31M etc
6.3G home
313M lib
32M lib64
16K lost+found
61G media
4.0K mnt
113M opt
du: cannot access `proc/6102/task/6102/fd/4': No such file or directory
0 proc
19M root
840K run
19M sbin
4.0K selinux
4.0K srv
25G store
26M tmp
then you would notice that store is large do a
cd /store
and run again
ls | xargs du -hs
Example output:
109M backup
358M fnb
4.0G iso
8.0K ks
16K lost+found
47M root
11M scripts
79M tmp
21G vms
in this case the vms directory is the space hog.
1
Why not using simpler tools likebaobab
? (see marzocca.net/linux/baobab/baobab-getting-started.html)
– Yvan
May 5 '15 at 7:11
2
Hmls
+xargs
seems like overkill,du -sh /*
works just fine by itself
– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:35
1
if you don't know about ncdu ... you'll thank me later: dev.yorhel.nl/ncdu
– Troy Folger
Dec 5 '16 at 22:56
add a comment |
This is the easiest method I have found to date to find large files!
Here is a example if your root mount is full / (mount /root)
Example:
cd / (so you are in root)
ls | xargs du -hs
Example Output:
9.4M bin
63M boot
4.0K cgroup
680K dev
31M etc
6.3G home
313M lib
32M lib64
16K lost+found
61G media
4.0K mnt
113M opt
du: cannot access `proc/6102/task/6102/fd/4': No such file or directory
0 proc
19M root
840K run
19M sbin
4.0K selinux
4.0K srv
25G store
26M tmp
then you would notice that store is large do a
cd /store
and run again
ls | xargs du -hs
Example output:
109M backup
358M fnb
4.0G iso
8.0K ks
16K lost+found
47M root
11M scripts
79M tmp
21G vms
in this case the vms directory is the space hog.
1
Why not using simpler tools likebaobab
? (see marzocca.net/linux/baobab/baobab-getting-started.html)
– Yvan
May 5 '15 at 7:11
2
Hmls
+xargs
seems like overkill,du -sh /*
works just fine by itself
– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:35
1
if you don't know about ncdu ... you'll thank me later: dev.yorhel.nl/ncdu
– Troy Folger
Dec 5 '16 at 22:56
add a comment |
This is the easiest method I have found to date to find large files!
Here is a example if your root mount is full / (mount /root)
Example:
cd / (so you are in root)
ls | xargs du -hs
Example Output:
9.4M bin
63M boot
4.0K cgroup
680K dev
31M etc
6.3G home
313M lib
32M lib64
16K lost+found
61G media
4.0K mnt
113M opt
du: cannot access `proc/6102/task/6102/fd/4': No such file or directory
0 proc
19M root
840K run
19M sbin
4.0K selinux
4.0K srv
25G store
26M tmp
then you would notice that store is large do a
cd /store
and run again
ls | xargs du -hs
Example output:
109M backup
358M fnb
4.0G iso
8.0K ks
16K lost+found
47M root
11M scripts
79M tmp
21G vms
in this case the vms directory is the space hog.
This is the easiest method I have found to date to find large files!
Here is a example if your root mount is full / (mount /root)
Example:
cd / (so you are in root)
ls | xargs du -hs
Example Output:
9.4M bin
63M boot
4.0K cgroup
680K dev
31M etc
6.3G home
313M lib
32M lib64
16K lost+found
61G media
4.0K mnt
113M opt
du: cannot access `proc/6102/task/6102/fd/4': No such file or directory
0 proc
19M root
840K run
19M sbin
4.0K selinux
4.0K srv
25G store
26M tmp
then you would notice that store is large do a
cd /store
and run again
ls | xargs du -hs
Example output:
109M backup
358M fnb
4.0G iso
8.0K ks
16K lost+found
47M root
11M scripts
79M tmp
21G vms
in this case the vms directory is the space hog.
answered Jun 26 '11 at 13:05
RiaanRiaan
321313
321313
1
Why not using simpler tools likebaobab
? (see marzocca.net/linux/baobab/baobab-getting-started.html)
– Yvan
May 5 '15 at 7:11
2
Hmls
+xargs
seems like overkill,du -sh /*
works just fine by itself
– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:35
1
if you don't know about ncdu ... you'll thank me later: dev.yorhel.nl/ncdu
– Troy Folger
Dec 5 '16 at 22:56
add a comment |
1
Why not using simpler tools likebaobab
? (see marzocca.net/linux/baobab/baobab-getting-started.html)
– Yvan
May 5 '15 at 7:11
2
Hmls
+xargs
seems like overkill,du -sh /*
works just fine by itself
– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:35
1
if you don't know about ncdu ... you'll thank me later: dev.yorhel.nl/ncdu
– Troy Folger
Dec 5 '16 at 22:56
1
1
Why not using simpler tools like
baobab
? (see marzocca.net/linux/baobab/baobab-getting-started.html)– Yvan
May 5 '15 at 7:11
Why not using simpler tools like
baobab
? (see marzocca.net/linux/baobab/baobab-getting-started.html)– Yvan
May 5 '15 at 7:11
2
2
Hm
ls
+ xargs
seems like overkill, du -sh /*
works just fine by itself– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:35
Hm
ls
+ xargs
seems like overkill, du -sh /*
works just fine by itself– ChrisWue
Aug 8 '16 at 1:35
1
1
if you don't know about ncdu ... you'll thank me later: dev.yorhel.nl/ncdu
– Troy Folger
Dec 5 '16 at 22:56
if you don't know about ncdu ... you'll thank me later: dev.yorhel.nl/ncdu
– Troy Folger
Dec 5 '16 at 22:56
add a comment |
For me, I needed to run sudo du
as there were a large amount of docker files under /var/lib/docker
that a non-sudo user doesn't have permission to read.
This was my problem. I forgot I switched storage systems in docker and the old volumes were still hanging around.
– Richard Nienaber
Jan 9 at 9:21
add a comment |
For me, I needed to run sudo du
as there were a large amount of docker files under /var/lib/docker
that a non-sudo user doesn't have permission to read.
This was my problem. I forgot I switched storage systems in docker and the old volumes were still hanging around.
– Richard Nienaber
Jan 9 at 9:21
add a comment |
For me, I needed to run sudo du
as there were a large amount of docker files under /var/lib/docker
that a non-sudo user doesn't have permission to read.
For me, I needed to run sudo du
as there were a large amount of docker files under /var/lib/docker
that a non-sudo user doesn't have permission to read.
answered Feb 9 '18 at 11:51
jobeversjobevers
1213
1213
This was my problem. I forgot I switched storage systems in docker and the old volumes were still hanging around.
– Richard Nienaber
Jan 9 at 9:21
add a comment |
This was my problem. I forgot I switched storage systems in docker and the old volumes were still hanging around.
– Richard Nienaber
Jan 9 at 9:21
This was my problem. I forgot I switched storage systems in docker and the old volumes were still hanging around.
– Richard Nienaber
Jan 9 at 9:21
This was my problem. I forgot I switched storage systems in docker and the old volumes were still hanging around.
– Richard Nienaber
Jan 9 at 9:21
add a comment |
So I had this problem in Centos 7 as well and found a solution after trying a bunch of stuff like bleachbit and cleaning /usr and /var even though they only showed about 7G each. Was still showing 50G of 50G used in the root partition but only showed 9G of file usage. Ran a live ubuntu cd and unmounted the offending 50G partition, opened terminal and ran xfs_check and xfs_repair on the partition. I then remounted the partition and my lost+found directory had expanded to 40G. Sorted the lost+found by size and found a 38G text log file for steam that eventualy just repeated a mp3 error. Removed the large file and now have space and my disks usage agrees with my root partition size. I would still like to know how to get the steam log to not grow so big again.
Did this happen to you at work? serverfault.com/help/on-topic
– chicks
May 4 '17 at 20:37
No just on my home computer.
– Justin Chadwick
May 6 '17 at 2:57
3
xfs_fsr
fixed this issue for us
– Druska
Aug 17 '17 at 18:34
add a comment |
So I had this problem in Centos 7 as well and found a solution after trying a bunch of stuff like bleachbit and cleaning /usr and /var even though they only showed about 7G each. Was still showing 50G of 50G used in the root partition but only showed 9G of file usage. Ran a live ubuntu cd and unmounted the offending 50G partition, opened terminal and ran xfs_check and xfs_repair on the partition. I then remounted the partition and my lost+found directory had expanded to 40G. Sorted the lost+found by size and found a 38G text log file for steam that eventualy just repeated a mp3 error. Removed the large file and now have space and my disks usage agrees with my root partition size. I would still like to know how to get the steam log to not grow so big again.
Did this happen to you at work? serverfault.com/help/on-topic
– chicks
May 4 '17 at 20:37
No just on my home computer.
– Justin Chadwick
May 6 '17 at 2:57
3
xfs_fsr
fixed this issue for us
– Druska
Aug 17 '17 at 18:34
add a comment |
So I had this problem in Centos 7 as well and found a solution after trying a bunch of stuff like bleachbit and cleaning /usr and /var even though they only showed about 7G each. Was still showing 50G of 50G used in the root partition but only showed 9G of file usage. Ran a live ubuntu cd and unmounted the offending 50G partition, opened terminal and ran xfs_check and xfs_repair on the partition. I then remounted the partition and my lost+found directory had expanded to 40G. Sorted the lost+found by size and found a 38G text log file for steam that eventualy just repeated a mp3 error. Removed the large file and now have space and my disks usage agrees with my root partition size. I would still like to know how to get the steam log to not grow so big again.
So I had this problem in Centos 7 as well and found a solution after trying a bunch of stuff like bleachbit and cleaning /usr and /var even though they only showed about 7G each. Was still showing 50G of 50G used in the root partition but only showed 9G of file usage. Ran a live ubuntu cd and unmounted the offending 50G partition, opened terminal and ran xfs_check and xfs_repair on the partition. I then remounted the partition and my lost+found directory had expanded to 40G. Sorted the lost+found by size and found a 38G text log file for steam that eventualy just repeated a mp3 error. Removed the large file and now have space and my disks usage agrees with my root partition size. I would still like to know how to get the steam log to not grow so big again.
answered May 4 '17 at 18:01
Justin ChadwickJustin Chadwick
112
112
Did this happen to you at work? serverfault.com/help/on-topic
– chicks
May 4 '17 at 20:37
No just on my home computer.
– Justin Chadwick
May 6 '17 at 2:57
3
xfs_fsr
fixed this issue for us
– Druska
Aug 17 '17 at 18:34
add a comment |
Did this happen to you at work? serverfault.com/help/on-topic
– chicks
May 4 '17 at 20:37
No just on my home computer.
– Justin Chadwick
May 6 '17 at 2:57
3
xfs_fsr
fixed this issue for us
– Druska
Aug 17 '17 at 18:34
Did this happen to you at work? serverfault.com/help/on-topic
– chicks
May 4 '17 at 20:37
Did this happen to you at work? serverfault.com/help/on-topic
– chicks
May 4 '17 at 20:37
No just on my home computer.
– Justin Chadwick
May 6 '17 at 2:57
No just on my home computer.
– Justin Chadwick
May 6 '17 at 2:57
3
3
xfs_fsr
fixed this issue for us– Druska
Aug 17 '17 at 18:34
xfs_fsr
fixed this issue for us– Druska
Aug 17 '17 at 18:34
add a comment |
if the mounted disk is a shared folder on a windows machine, then it seems that df will show the size and disk use of the entire windows disk, but du will show only the part of the disk that you have access too. (and is mounted). so in this case the problem must be fixed on the windows machine.
add a comment |
if the mounted disk is a shared folder on a windows machine, then it seems that df will show the size and disk use of the entire windows disk, but du will show only the part of the disk that you have access too. (and is mounted). so in this case the problem must be fixed on the windows machine.
add a comment |
if the mounted disk is a shared folder on a windows machine, then it seems that df will show the size and disk use of the entire windows disk, but du will show only the part of the disk that you have access too. (and is mounted). so in this case the problem must be fixed on the windows machine.
if the mounted disk is a shared folder on a windows machine, then it seems that df will show the size and disk use of the entire windows disk, but du will show only the part of the disk that you have access too. (and is mounted). so in this case the problem must be fixed on the windows machine.
answered Jun 21 '12 at 10:33
SverreSverre
503720
503720
add a comment |
add a comment |
One more possibility to consider - you are almost guaranteed to see a big discrepancy if you are using docker, and you run df/du inside a container that is using volume mounts. In the case of a directory mounted to a volume on the docker host, df will report the HOST's df totals. This is obvious if you think about it, but when you get a report of a "runaway container filling the disk!", make sure you verify the container's filespace consumption with something like du -hs <dir>
.
add a comment |
One more possibility to consider - you are almost guaranteed to see a big discrepancy if you are using docker, and you run df/du inside a container that is using volume mounts. In the case of a directory mounted to a volume on the docker host, df will report the HOST's df totals. This is obvious if you think about it, but when you get a report of a "runaway container filling the disk!", make sure you verify the container's filespace consumption with something like du -hs <dir>
.
add a comment |
One more possibility to consider - you are almost guaranteed to see a big discrepancy if you are using docker, and you run df/du inside a container that is using volume mounts. In the case of a directory mounted to a volume on the docker host, df will report the HOST's df totals. This is obvious if you think about it, but when you get a report of a "runaway container filling the disk!", make sure you verify the container's filespace consumption with something like du -hs <dir>
.
One more possibility to consider - you are almost guaranteed to see a big discrepancy if you are using docker, and you run df/du inside a container that is using volume mounts. In the case of a directory mounted to a volume on the docker host, df will report the HOST's df totals. This is obvious if you think about it, but when you get a report of a "runaway container filling the disk!", make sure you verify the container's filespace consumption with something like du -hs <dir>
.
answered Dec 5 '16 at 23:02
Troy FolgerTroy Folger
1212
1212
add a comment |
add a comment |
A similar thing happened to us in production, disk usage went to 98%. Did the following investigation :
a) df -i
for checking the inode usage, inode usage was 6% so not much smaller files
b) Mounting root
and checking hidden files. Could not file any extra files. du
results were same as before mount.
c) Finally, checked nginx
logs. It was configured to write to disk but a developer deleted the log file directly causing nginx
to keep all the logs in-memory. As the file /var/log/nginx/access.log
was deleted from disk using rm
it was not visible using du
but the file was getting accessed by nginx
and hence it was still held open
add a comment |
A similar thing happened to us in production, disk usage went to 98%. Did the following investigation :
a) df -i
for checking the inode usage, inode usage was 6% so not much smaller files
b) Mounting root
and checking hidden files. Could not file any extra files. du
results were same as before mount.
c) Finally, checked nginx
logs. It was configured to write to disk but a developer deleted the log file directly causing nginx
to keep all the logs in-memory. As the file /var/log/nginx/access.log
was deleted from disk using rm
it was not visible using du
but the file was getting accessed by nginx
and hence it was still held open
add a comment |
A similar thing happened to us in production, disk usage went to 98%. Did the following investigation :
a) df -i
for checking the inode usage, inode usage was 6% so not much smaller files
b) Mounting root
and checking hidden files. Could not file any extra files. du
results were same as before mount.
c) Finally, checked nginx
logs. It was configured to write to disk but a developer deleted the log file directly causing nginx
to keep all the logs in-memory. As the file /var/log/nginx/access.log
was deleted from disk using rm
it was not visible using du
but the file was getting accessed by nginx
and hence it was still held open
A similar thing happened to us in production, disk usage went to 98%. Did the following investigation :
a) df -i
for checking the inode usage, inode usage was 6% so not much smaller files
b) Mounting root
and checking hidden files. Could not file any extra files. du
results were same as before mount.
c) Finally, checked nginx
logs. It was configured to write to disk but a developer deleted the log file directly causing nginx
to keep all the logs in-memory. As the file /var/log/nginx/access.log
was deleted from disk using rm
it was not visible using du
but the file was getting accessed by nginx
and hence it was still held open
edited Apr 20 '18 at 19:36
answered Apr 20 '18 at 19:23
darxtrixdarxtrix
1034
1034
add a comment |
add a comment |
I had the same problem that is mentioned in this topic, but in one VPS.
So I have tested everything that is described in this topic but without success.
The solution was a contact for support with our VPS provider who performed a quota recalculation and corrected the space difference of df -h
and du-sh /
.
add a comment |
I had the same problem that is mentioned in this topic, but in one VPS.
So I have tested everything that is described in this topic but without success.
The solution was a contact for support with our VPS provider who performed a quota recalculation and corrected the space difference of df -h
and du-sh /
.
add a comment |
I had the same problem that is mentioned in this topic, but in one VPS.
So I have tested everything that is described in this topic but without success.
The solution was a contact for support with our VPS provider who performed a quota recalculation and corrected the space difference of df -h
and du-sh /
.
I had the same problem that is mentioned in this topic, but in one VPS.
So I have tested everything that is described in this topic but without success.
The solution was a contact for support with our VPS provider who performed a quota recalculation and corrected the space difference of df -h
and du-sh /
.
answered Jul 18 '18 at 13:33
ldxdldxd
32
32
add a comment |
add a comment |
I ran into this problem on a FreeBSD box today. The issue was that it was an artifact of vi
(not vim
, not sure if vim
would create this problem). The file was consuming space but hadn't fully been written to disk.
You can check that with:
$ fstat -f /path/to/mount/point |sort -nk8 |tail
This looks at all open files and sorts (numerically via -n
) by the 8th column (key, -k8
), showing the last ten items.
In my case, the final (largest) entry looked like this:
bob vi 12345 4 /var 97267 -rwx------ 1569454080 rw
This meant process (PID) 12345 was consuming 1.46G (the eighth column divided by 1024³) of disk despite the lack of du
noticing it. vi
is horrible at viewing extremely large files; even 100MB is large for it. 1.5G (or however large that file actually was) is ridiculous.
The solution was to sudo kill -HUP 12345
(if that didn't work, I'd sudo kill 12345
and if that also fails, the dreaded kill -9
would come into play).
Avoid text editors on large files. Sample workarounds for quick skimming:
Assuming reasonable line lengths:
head -n1000 big.log; tail -n1000 big.log |vim -R -
wc -l big.log |awk -v n=2000 'NR==FNRL=$1;nextFNR%int(L/n)==1' - big.log |vim -R -
Assuming unreasonably large line(s):
head -c8000 big.log; tail -c8000 big.log |vim -R -
These use vim -R
in place of view
because vim
is nearly always better ... when it's installed. Feel free to pipe them into view
or vi -R
instead.
If you're opening such a large file to actually edit it, consider sed
or awk
or some other programmatic approach.
add a comment |
I ran into this problem on a FreeBSD box today. The issue was that it was an artifact of vi
(not vim
, not sure if vim
would create this problem). The file was consuming space but hadn't fully been written to disk.
You can check that with:
$ fstat -f /path/to/mount/point |sort -nk8 |tail
This looks at all open files and sorts (numerically via -n
) by the 8th column (key, -k8
), showing the last ten items.
In my case, the final (largest) entry looked like this:
bob vi 12345 4 /var 97267 -rwx------ 1569454080 rw
This meant process (PID) 12345 was consuming 1.46G (the eighth column divided by 1024³) of disk despite the lack of du
noticing it. vi
is horrible at viewing extremely large files; even 100MB is large for it. 1.5G (or however large that file actually was) is ridiculous.
The solution was to sudo kill -HUP 12345
(if that didn't work, I'd sudo kill 12345
and if that also fails, the dreaded kill -9
would come into play).
Avoid text editors on large files. Sample workarounds for quick skimming:
Assuming reasonable line lengths:
head -n1000 big.log; tail -n1000 big.log |vim -R -
wc -l big.log |awk -v n=2000 'NR==FNRL=$1;nextFNR%int(L/n)==1' - big.log |vim -R -
Assuming unreasonably large line(s):
head -c8000 big.log; tail -c8000 big.log |vim -R -
These use vim -R
in place of view
because vim
is nearly always better ... when it's installed. Feel free to pipe them into view
or vi -R
instead.
If you're opening such a large file to actually edit it, consider sed
or awk
or some other programmatic approach.
add a comment |
I ran into this problem on a FreeBSD box today. The issue was that it was an artifact of vi
(not vim
, not sure if vim
would create this problem). The file was consuming space but hadn't fully been written to disk.
You can check that with:
$ fstat -f /path/to/mount/point |sort -nk8 |tail
This looks at all open files and sorts (numerically via -n
) by the 8th column (key, -k8
), showing the last ten items.
In my case, the final (largest) entry looked like this:
bob vi 12345 4 /var 97267 -rwx------ 1569454080 rw
This meant process (PID) 12345 was consuming 1.46G (the eighth column divided by 1024³) of disk despite the lack of du
noticing it. vi
is horrible at viewing extremely large files; even 100MB is large for it. 1.5G (or however large that file actually was) is ridiculous.
The solution was to sudo kill -HUP 12345
(if that didn't work, I'd sudo kill 12345
and if that also fails, the dreaded kill -9
would come into play).
Avoid text editors on large files. Sample workarounds for quick skimming:
Assuming reasonable line lengths:
head -n1000 big.log; tail -n1000 big.log |vim -R -
wc -l big.log |awk -v n=2000 'NR==FNRL=$1;nextFNR%int(L/n)==1' - big.log |vim -R -
Assuming unreasonably large line(s):
head -c8000 big.log; tail -c8000 big.log |vim -R -
These use vim -R
in place of view
because vim
is nearly always better ... when it's installed. Feel free to pipe them into view
or vi -R
instead.
If you're opening such a large file to actually edit it, consider sed
or awk
or some other programmatic approach.
I ran into this problem on a FreeBSD box today. The issue was that it was an artifact of vi
(not vim
, not sure if vim
would create this problem). The file was consuming space but hadn't fully been written to disk.
You can check that with:
$ fstat -f /path/to/mount/point |sort -nk8 |tail
This looks at all open files and sorts (numerically via -n
) by the 8th column (key, -k8
), showing the last ten items.
In my case, the final (largest) entry looked like this:
bob vi 12345 4 /var 97267 -rwx------ 1569454080 rw
This meant process (PID) 12345 was consuming 1.46G (the eighth column divided by 1024³) of disk despite the lack of du
noticing it. vi
is horrible at viewing extremely large files; even 100MB is large for it. 1.5G (or however large that file actually was) is ridiculous.
The solution was to sudo kill -HUP 12345
(if that didn't work, I'd sudo kill 12345
and if that also fails, the dreaded kill -9
would come into play).
Avoid text editors on large files. Sample workarounds for quick skimming:
Assuming reasonable line lengths:
head -n1000 big.log; tail -n1000 big.log |vim -R -
wc -l big.log |awk -v n=2000 'NR==FNRL=$1;nextFNR%int(L/n)==1' - big.log |vim -R -
Assuming unreasonably large line(s):
head -c8000 big.log; tail -c8000 big.log |vim -R -
These use vim -R
in place of view
because vim
is nearly always better ... when it's installed. Feel free to pipe them into view
or vi -R
instead.
If you're opening such a large file to actually edit it, consider sed
or awk
or some other programmatic approach.
answered Oct 12 '18 at 21:58
Adam KatzAdam Katz
522415
522415
add a comment |
add a comment |
check if your server have ossec agent installed. Or some proccess is using the deleted log files. In my a time ago was ossec agent.
1
OP mentioned that the machine was rebooted, so there should be no deleted files left.
– RalfFriedl
Mar 5 at 18:06
add a comment |
check if your server have ossec agent installed. Or some proccess is using the deleted log files. In my a time ago was ossec agent.
1
OP mentioned that the machine was rebooted, so there should be no deleted files left.
– RalfFriedl
Mar 5 at 18:06
add a comment |
check if your server have ossec agent installed. Or some proccess is using the deleted log files. In my a time ago was ossec agent.
check if your server have ossec agent installed. Or some proccess is using the deleted log files. In my a time ago was ossec agent.
answered Mar 5 at 17:43
Richard MéridaRichard Mérida
1
1
1
OP mentioned that the machine was rebooted, so there should be no deleted files left.
– RalfFriedl
Mar 5 at 18:06
add a comment |
1
OP mentioned that the machine was rebooted, so there should be no deleted files left.
– RalfFriedl
Mar 5 at 18:06
1
1
OP mentioned that the machine was rebooted, so there should be no deleted files left.
– RalfFriedl
Mar 5 at 18:06
OP mentioned that the machine was rebooted, so there should be no deleted files left.
– RalfFriedl
Mar 5 at 18:06
add a comment |
check the /lost+found, I had a system (centos 7) and some of file in the /lost+found ate up all the space.
How would this account for the difference in reported disk usage as described in the question?
– roaima
Nov 30 '16 at 23:36
add a comment |
check the /lost+found, I had a system (centos 7) and some of file in the /lost+found ate up all the space.
How would this account for the difference in reported disk usage as described in the question?
– roaima
Nov 30 '16 at 23:36
add a comment |
check the /lost+found, I had a system (centos 7) and some of file in the /lost+found ate up all the space.
check the /lost+found, I had a system (centos 7) and some of file in the /lost+found ate up all the space.
edited Nov 23 '16 at 23:01
Michael Hampton♦
176k27322653
176k27322653
answered Nov 23 '16 at 22:24
Jude ZhuJude Zhu
1
1
How would this account for the difference in reported disk usage as described in the question?
– roaima
Nov 30 '16 at 23:36
add a comment |
How would this account for the difference in reported disk usage as described in the question?
– roaima
Nov 30 '16 at 23:36
How would this account for the difference in reported disk usage as described in the question?
– roaima
Nov 30 '16 at 23:36
How would this account for the difference in reported disk usage as described in the question?
– roaima
Nov 30 '16 at 23:36
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Server Fault!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f275206%2fdisk-full-du-tells-different-how-to-further-investigate%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
This is very close to the question: linux - du vs. df difference (serverfault.com/questions/57098/du-vs-df-difference). The solution was files under a mount point as OldTroll answered.
– Chris Ting
May 30 '11 at 16:45