Hi,

It's a LXD bug which mis-reports the image size. This has been fixed
upstream and the fix is in LXD 2.0.4.

| x (9 more)         | 3ec1d8bbca28 | yes    | ubuntu 16.04 LTS amd64 (release) 
(20160815)     | x86_64  | 174.73MB | Aug 15, 2016 at 12:00am (UTC) |

This was caused by the switch to squashfs images, LXD would report the
size of tar+squashfs instead of just selecting squashfs. This also would
lead to the wrong fingerprint being reported (that of the tarball
instead of squashfs).

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 05:20:55PM +0300, Andrey Repin wrote:
> Greetings, Simos Xenitellis!
> 
> > Hi All,
> 
> > Until a few weeks ago, the Xenial image ("ubuntu:x" for x86_64), as 
> > reported by
> 
> > lxc image list ubuntu:
> 
> > used to be around 140MB.
> > See, for example,
> > https://simos.info/blog/playing-around-with-lxd-containers-lxc-on-ubuntu/
> > (138.23MB)
> 
> 
> > However, if you run now the same command, the size of the image has
> > gone up to 315MB:
> 
> > | x (9 more)         | 295d53ae6db4 | yes    | ubuntu 16.04 LTS amd64
> > (release) (20160815)     | x86_64  | 315.82MB | Aug 15, 2016 at
> > 12:00am (UTC) |
> 
> > It looks like an error, since all other images in the list are all under 
> > 150MB.
> 
> Sounds just like someone using tar in addition mode, and adding the same files
> over and over again.
> Can you please dump the TAR header and see what really contains in the image?
> If I'm right, the image will contain lots of duplicated paths.
> 
> 
> -- 
> With best regards,
> Andrey Repin
> Monday, August 29, 2016 17:19:41
> 
> Sorry for my terrible english...
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lxc-users mailing list
> lxc-users@lists.linuxcontainers.org
> http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users

-- 
Stéphane Graber
Ubuntu developer
http://www.ubuntu.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
lxc-users mailing list
lxc-users@lists.linuxcontainers.org
http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users

Reply via email to