[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 7:55:40
Message-ID: 88f9c9ab-f3ae-441e-a3e1-8ba256b35dec () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


On 20/2/24 18:11, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
> 
> 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.
> 


Back. On booting up problem machine I was greeted with warnings in disk 
space low on /. I generally don't log into desktop on this machine. 
Deleted 4 snapshots. df immediately reported used space 33G (down from 
35G) and free space 2.9G, up from ~200M at login.  I don't think I've 
EVER seen used space and free space equal size before.

I rebooted just to see if anything changed. 10 mins later df is still 
reporting
Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
36G   33G  2.9G  92% /


apt update/upgrade gave me
63 upgraded, 3 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 337 MB of archives.


which I reckon is what I got yesterday after I moved my home to my data 
partition and

Quoted from 19Feb at 10:26  (UTC 18Feb at 23:26):
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.

And earlier:My effort to date is to move my home to /mnt/data and 
sym-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.

Back to present, apt is setting up the kernel-image & headers. And 
completed to upgrade while I typed that last sentence.
df is reporting 36G 35G 1004M - still used + free = size
Rebooted and df reports  36G   35G  888M  98% /



For now, I'll expand / partition and reduce timeshift retention rules


When I've completed the reading assignment I have from Sunday, I'll move 
on.   I might start with changing timeshift to use rsync instead of 
btrfs - just to see how it compares. And put snapshots on another 
partition. They should really be on a separate drive, but that machine 
doesn't have a 2nd drive bay that I could  see when I swapped the system 
drive last year when I was given the now 8 year old machine.


I'm looking forward to your responses



-- 
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]