[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       debian-user
Subject:    Re: partition reporting full, but not
From:       Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau () gmail ! com>
Date:       2024-02-20 7:11:35
Message-ID: baac25dc-5d19-4f6f-8e5e-437ab3c323e0 () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


On 19/2/24 14:20, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
> 
> On 19/2/24 10:26, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
>>
>> On 18/2/24 14:49, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
>>>
>>> On 18/2/24 07:34, debian-user@howorth.org.uk wrote:
>>>> Keith Bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Yes the / partitions are btrfs
>>>>
>>>> So the apparently missing space is perhaps taken up by btrfs snapshots.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Seems to be the prime suspect.   If that's the case, btrfs is NOT 
>>> hard- linking the snapshots as timeshift claims it does. The only way 
>>> to check is install on ext4 and compare. I have saves enough free 
>>> space to do this.
>>>
>>> My effort to date is to move my home to /mnt/data and sim-link it 
>>> into / home. df is now showing 2.3GB free on /.  df showed /home as 
>>> 2.2GB yesterday.  At least there is a little space to play with; and 
>>> give me time to consider. A fresh install may be worth checking in 
>>> snapshots are as big as this all makes them look.
>>>
>>> a few brief answer to other comments will follow
>>
>>
>> So later yesterday afternoon I created a new snapshot with no obvious 
>> change is free space.
>>
>> I then update/upgrade.   The initial attempt told me
>> 63 upgraded, 3 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>> Need to get 337 MB of archives.
>> After this operation, 473 MB of additional disk space will be used.
>> Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
>>
>> But the 3 kernel related packages failed to install a couple of times. 
>> When I finally figured I should check space, there was none.   I 
>> rolled back to prior to the upgrade, but still no free space.
>>
>> I said sometime in this thread that timeshift (and BiT) use hard links 
>> to create progressive copies of the system. The more I think about how 
>> hard links reportedly work, I reckon it can't be simply hard links.
>>
>> So I'm starting a new thread on that topic.
>>
>>
> 
> So I'm back to see some more helpful hints. Thanks folk
> 
> I am convinced that the missing space is used by btrfs snapshot process. 
> But WHY is the used space reporting on my daily driver LESS than that on 
> the spare machine  29G vs 35G? The original install was the same .iso 
>   Ah well
> 
> I could add some of the spare space the the / partition, but how much? 
> Play safe and use the lot, making it 60G compared to 63G on my daily 
> driver. (And create some free space off the data partition before it's 
> too late.)
> 
> Just as well I have time on my hands
> 
> Again, thanks to all for your suggestions
> 

I am sure I saw a response to comment of mine, where I was misunderstood 
in the numbers I quoted for used space on my daily driver - 29G; and the 
space used by the problem machine - 35G.  There was a suggestion that I 
had not updated it as often as daily driver.    I had kept problem box 
as up to date as daily until a few days ago when it refused to update 
due to lack of space. This is when I discovered I had a problem. It is 
switched off at present, pending my deciding whether to expand / 
partition or re-install on the free space on ext4.   I will delete a few 
snapshots before I proceed, just to see what happens - I'll do that 
shortly, in fact, now I can see that it may have a bigger affect than I 
figured.

Now a minor amendment to my last note, where deleting snapshots has haad 
no bearing on used space.  Before I started, df reported 28G used, 
compared to 29G used yesterday. Remember my home is sym-linked from 
another partition. du is reporting /home is 3M which is the original 
/home/keith and re-named to keep it handy IN CASE I need it some day - 
like when I did some major surgery on that data partition the other 
week.  I'm trying to say that nothing I've done overnight has changed 
used space.  There were no packages to upgrade today.

df is now reporting 27G used on /   confirming btrfs seems to take time 
to reflect changes in snapshots.

Back later.

-- 
All the best

Keith Bainbridge

keith.bainbridge.3216@gmail.com
+61 (0)447 667 468

UTC + 10:00

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]