Bug 739574
| Summary: | du fails to get dir size correctly | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | techtonik | ||||
| Component: | coreutils | Assignee: | Ondrej Vasik <ovasik> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | unspecified | ||||||
| Version: | 15 | CC: | kdudka, maxamillion, ovasik, twaugh | ||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
| Last Closed: | 2012-07-16 11:42:30 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
techtonik
2011-09-19 14:40:27 UTC
What does 'correctly' mean in your case? What filesystem are you on? Did you try strace? (In reply to comment #1) > What does 'correctly' mean in your case? scons-hg-002 size should be 47M in both cases? > What filesystem are you on? $ mount | grep sda8 /dev/sda8 on /mnt/shared type ext3 (rw,noatime,seclabel,errors=continue,barrier=0,data=ordered) > Did you try strace? What's this? It's not installed on my system. (In reply to comment #2) > $ mount | grep sda8 > /dev/sda8 on /mnt/shared type ext3 > (rw,noatime,seclabel,errors=continue,barrier=0,data=ordered) Is the filesystem consistent? Did you try fsck? > > Did you try strace? > > What's this? It's not installed on my system. strace is a tool that traces system calls, certainly worth to install. You can capture the trace for du as follows: $ strace -o strace.log du ... If you try to repeat both steps 1. and 2. once again, do they produce the exactly same results? (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > $ mount | grep sda8 > > /dev/sda8 on /mnt/shared type ext3 > > (rw,noatime,seclabel,errors=continue,barrier=0,data=ordered) > > Is the filesystem consistent? Did you try fsck? Yes. I rebooted into 'single' mode and did a check on /dev/sda8 with no errors. > > > Did you try strace? > > > > What's this? It's not installed on my system. > > strace is a tool that traces system calls, certainly worth to install. You can > capture the trace for du as follows: > > $ strace -o strace.log du ... I'll attach with the next comment. > If you try to repeat both steps 1. and 2. once again, do they produce the > exactly same results? Well. It produces the same errors until. I've added a couple of other dirs there. Now the results become: $ du -hs * 41M checkout 4.0K getsize.py 30M onlytrunk 27M scons-hg 47M scons-hg-001 47M scons-hg-002 1.3M scons-hg-003 316K scons-hg-003.log 17M scons-hg-nobranches 108K scons-migration-scripts 1.4G scons-mirror Note that now scons-hg-003 is reported wrongly. $ rm -rf checkout $ du -hs * 4.0K getsize.py 30M onlytrunk 27M scons-hg 47M scons-hg-001 47M scons-hg-002 27M scons-hg-003 316K scons-hg-003.log 17M scons-hg-nobranches 108K scons-migration-scripts 1.4G scons-mirror No everything seems ok.I recreate the clone with Mercurial and it's broken again. $ hg clone scons-hg-002 checkout $ du -hs * 60M checkout 4.0K getsize.py 30M onlytrunk 27M scons-hg 47M scons-hg-001 1.6M scons-hg-002 27M scons-hg-003 316K scons-hg-003.log 17M scons-hg-nobranches 108K scons-migration-scripts 1.4G scons-mirror I'll attach strace.log for the last call. Created attachment 523870 [details]
strace.log
Are there any hard-linked files in that directory? $ find -type f -links +1 It appears that yes, there are. With `du -hsl` I get sizes correctly, but that's not intuitive and not needed by default. Especially in this case when directories are specified separately. This may be a duplicate of bug #561869 then. I could agree that this one is a duplicate if it wasn't hard to agree with resolution. Cleanup. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 561869 *** |