Tim wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Jonny Gerold <j...@thermeon.com
> <mailto:j...@thermeon.com>> wrote:
>
> Meh this is retarted. It looks like zpool list shows an incorrect
> calculation? Can anyone agree that this looks like a bug?
>
> r...@fsk-backup:~# df -h | grep ambry
> ambry 2.7T 27K 2.7T 1% /ambry
>
> r...@fsk-backup:~# zpool list
> NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT
> ambry 3.62T 132K 3.62T 0% ONLINE -
>
> r...@fsk-backup:~# zfs list
> NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
> ambry 92.0K 2.67T 26.9K /ambry
>
>
> From what I understand:
>
> zpool list shows total capacity of all the drives in the pool. df shows
> usable capacity after parity.
More specifically, from zpool(1m)
These space usage properties report actual physical space
available to the storage pool. The physical space can be
different from the total amount of space that any contained
datasets can actually use. The amount of space used in a
raidz configuration depends on the characteristics of the
data being written. In addition, ZFS reserves some space for
internal accounting that the zfs(1M) command takes into
account, but the zpool command does not. For non-full pools
of a reasonable size, these effects should be invisible. For
small pools, or pools that are close to being completely
full, these discrepancies may become more noticeable.
Similarly, from zfs(1m)
The amount of space available to the dataset and all its
children, assuming that there is no other activity in
the pool. Because space is shared within a pool, availa-
bility can be limited by any number of factors, includ-
ing physical pool size, quotas, reservations, or other
datasets within the pool.
IMHO, this is a little bit wordy, in an already long man page.
If you come up with a better way to say the same thing in
fewer words, then please file a bug against the man page.
-- richard
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
