2009/2/15 Patrick O'Callaghan <pocallag...@gmail.com>: > On Sun, 2009-02-15 at 23:11 +0000, Vijay Gill wrote: >> 2009/2/15 Rick <el...@spinics.net>: >> > In article <60fdb1ad0902151205v6ef67c07v128f0c88f5895...@mail.gmail.com>, >> > Vijay Gill <fedora-list@redhat.com> wrote: >> > >> >>Running du -h tells that the file occupies 512M but ls -l tells that >> >>the file is a lot smaller. >> > >> > Apples and oranges. You get the file *size* with ls and the disk usage >> > with du. They aren't the same thing. >> > >> > -- >> > http://yosemitenews.info/ >> > >> > -- >> > fedora-list mailing list >> > fedora-list@redhat.com >> > To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list >> > Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines >> > >> >> Thanks but I knew that already. I was just curious why 512Mbytes is >> allocated to a file so small? Also I have provided allocsize which is >> definitely not 512M! > > That could be because you're using XFS. > > poc > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@redhat.com > To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list > Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines >
Thanks but how does that statement explain the behaviour I am seeing? -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
