Using KInfoCenter | Memory module it shows my 2GB of ram. Approx. 14% is used for Application Data and Disk Cache has been anywhere from 29-35%...leaving approx 1GB free. Can this 'Disk Cache" be reduced leaving more memory free or is this determined by the OS?
I tried to install Portable VirtualBox using wine and even though I installed it on my /host/ folder (with 19 gb free) it downloaded some massive file on my Wubi installation (with 60 mb free) and now I am down to 3 mb left on Wubi and I can't find the massive file that it downloaded. Tried using the disk usage analyzer but nothing came up. Windows is unbootable so I can't use it.
Before this, Ubuntu would constantly decrease the amount of disk space I had free for no reason as well. It would jump from 120 mb one day to 50 mb.I moved my documents to my Windows folders but the disk space only stayed at 100 for another day or so before it went down again. apt-get auto/clean, localepurge, and deborphan are completely useless and there's something else going on behind the scenes here that I don't know about.Using Ubuntu Jaunty.
I have been having a lot of problems with disk errors and want to find a solution or more stable distro. I can not post the link yet since I am new but it is in the Ubuntu section of this forum and titled "Hibernate or spin down or hard shutdown causes errors." I am running Ubuntu 10.4 64bit on an AMD64 2.2gh.
I have been doing my research about distros and know a bit about what is going on with Linux. Sort of transcending past newbie I think. But I want to know what is the most stable distro for the least amount of Disk errors, or how to get ubuntu not to have so many errors. Maybe install the 32bit version? I want something fast and simple where I can run gimp/inkscape/openoffice/and maybe some of the video editing packages like Kino/piviti/cinerella.
I have a 500GB internal SATA and a 1TB external and i can't seem to determine what my free/available disk space amount is on my internal HD. External tells me when i right click on the drive...however, that doesn't work on the internal. I've tried using the Disk Utility app, but I can't seem to get that same data/read-out. Is there (preferable) CLI command that can be used to do this -specifically, by drive?
We use a SLES 10 SP2 file server. This file server has all type of files. We want to know what is the amount of space used by mp3 files. What we need to know is the total space in disk of mp3 files. I've been testing du command, and find command, but with no satisfactory results. Does anybody know how to do this?
I'm new to Fedora 14, vmware player. After getting Fedora up and running in VMware player. The disk size was 2.7 GB. After three hours of working with it, the disk size has bloated to 4.3 GB. I havent added software to account for the near doubling in size. How do I reduce the size back to 2.7GB range or lower. Im new to Fedora and superuser controls. Im removing more software than adding software. Is this a VMWARE problem or Fedora problem?
I am using LVM2 and have shrinked my /home partition and extended my / partition but I'm not sure if I used all the free space when growing my / partition. How can I find out? I prefer using the terminal if there is a graphical way to do this but I would like to know both ways if there are two ways.
I have a rack of four 1TB drives all partitioned identically with three primary partitions. On each drive
- the first partition is only 64MB; - the second is a large 900GB partition and - the last holds all the remaining space
mdadm has been used to set up /dev/md0 - RAID1, comprised of /dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1 /dev/md1 - RAID5, comprised of /dev/sda2, /dev/sdb2, /dev/sdc2, /dev/sdd2 /dev/md2 - RAID5, comprised of /dev/sda3, /dev/sdb3, /dev/sdc3, /dev/sdd3
OK, so it was a silly mistake to make - but I am now need to increase the size of /dev/md0. My thinking is to reduce the size of md1 so that I can grow md0.
On md1 I have two logical volumes. I've successfully reduced the size of the volume so that I can reduce the size of md1. Now I'm at the nervous stage; I can find little written on the topic of shrinking RAID5 arrays - and even if I do this I'm unsure if I can move partitions around to regain the space I so desire.
Is it possible to use one fast disk as a giant file cache?
I.e. automatically copying frequently accessed data to that one disk, and transparently redirecting reads and writes to that disk, so that other drives would only have be accessed occassionally.
(writes would have to be forwarded to the other disks after a while of course)
Advantages:
The other drives could be powered down most of the time; reducing power, heat, noise speed of the other drives would not matter much. cache disk could be solid state.
How can I set such a system up?
What OS supports these options? Is this possible at all using Windows or Linux?
Example:
There are 3 disks with 1 Tb each. most of the files are only accessed very rarely, but about 5% of each disk is used frequently.
Which files are used frequently may change over time.
A solid state disk with 150GB should cache the currently frequently accessed files, so that access time is faster and the drives can be put into power saving mode.
I've just bought a 6-core Phenom with 16G of RAM. I use it primarily for compiling and video encoding (and occassional web/db). I'm finding all activities get disk-bound and I just can't keep all 6 cores fed. I'm buying an SSD raid to sit between the HDD and tmpfs. I want to setup a "layered" filesystem where reads are cached on tmpfs but writes safely go through to the SSD. I want files (or blocks) that haven't been read lately on the SSD to then be written back to a HDD using a compressed FS or block layer.
So basically reads: - Check tmpfs - Check SSD - Check HD
And writes: - Straight to SSD (for safety), then tmpfs (for speed) And periodically, or when space gets low: - Move least frequently accessed files down one layer. I've seen a few projects of interest. CacheFS, cachefsd, bcache seem pretty close but I'm having trouble determining which are practical. bcache seems a little risky (early adoption), cachefs seems tied to specific network filesystems. There are "union" projects unionfs and aufs that let you mount filesystems over each other (USB device over a DVD usually) but both are distributed as a patch and I get the impression this sort of "transparent" mounting was going to become a kernel feature rather than a FS.
I know the kernel has a built-in disk cache but it doesn't seem to work well with compiling. I see a 20x speed improvement when I move my source files to tmpfs. I think it's because the standard buffers are dedicated to a specific process and compiling creates and destroys thousands of processes during a build (just guessing there). It looks like I really want those files precached.....
(Ubuntu Linux server, 64-bits)I was troubleshooting a problem with a file (~3.0 GB) which I had just downloaded, but it was failing the integrity test, when I discovered something really unusual.First this is the MD5 of the file after download, which didn't match the expected value:
This was really unexpected. Since I have a lot of RAM, I suspected this was the effect of caching and something was going awry with it. I decided to retry with the whole file from disk, for my surprise:
~% sudo sysctl -w vm.drop_caches=3 # This linux command invalidates vm.drop_caches = 3 # everything in the memory cache. ~% md5sum media.iso 2992aa6270f6e1de9154730ed3beedc1 media.iso
I redid it and now it seems to stay consistent, although this still isn't the value I was expecting. Certainly, the contents in memory cache were different from the contents on disk.This is the big problem.To fix the download, I created a torrent on the source machine and opened it in the target machine. Five 1MB chunks out of ~3.0GB failed integrity check. I used the torrent to fix these file chunks and how the file integrity is ok.The problem now is to determine where the data got out-of-sync.
I tested the memory with memtest86+, all but the bit fading test. I was expecting to see some failing memory module, but there wasn't anything. Everything is ok.Filesystem is Ext4, over LVM2, over a 3-disk RAID5 array.Ext4 is considered stable, and if data were inconsistent between disks, mdadm would have warned. But there is nothing in the logs. S.M.A.R.T. error logs are clean, the disks are new (have less than 30 days of "power-on-hours").I'm looking for information about any data-loss bugs in my current kernel (2.6.35), but there doesn't seem to be anything, as far as I looked.what else I could check, or where exactly could be the defect/bug?It is a Ubuntu 10.10 64-bit, Core i7 930, 6 GB non-ECC RAM.
Update: I confirmed that the files are being correctly written to the disk, the pages are being altered after they are read from disk, while in memory. I did a lot more memtests (I left it doing bit fade test overnight),and still nothing. All memory modules seem ok.Some more tests:
~% md5sum media.iso cc8bcf1ce67ff7704eadc2222650c087 media.iso ~% cp media.iso tmp[code]....(direcat is a version of cat that reads with O_DIRECT, that is, bypassing page cache)There is a clear pattern: it always happens to the 2nd byte in a 16-byte alignment. In that byte, almost always the bit 4 (LSB) flips to one, but there was one instance where bit 2 flipped to zero.
so i have f12 installed on my hd with lvm using the whole extent of the HD , i want to reduce it so i can dual boot it with a windows system, i managed to reduce the logical volume to free some space, but i cant seem to reduce the physical volume, is this possible and how ?
It seems like the optimal use would be as a cache for the regular hard drives in my computer. Eliminating the need for a fast hard drive, so I can just use a slow 2TB (~US$100) drive with a SSD cache.
Is there a good way to do this yet?
It seems like it would be nice to be able to exclude some files from caching, for things like bittorrent.
While installing OS, in partition window after OS file system structure I've left 277 GB. But after installation it shows Size - 255GB and available disk space is 242 GB.
Isn't it weired? How can I use the total amount of space in Linux? I need the whole 277GB exactly. What should be my workaround?
I'm working on a few servers running centos and using postfix. I don't know what the exact problem is, but we are having problems with the disk space being maxed out at 100 gigs. What we think the problem is...is that postfix is either caching or logging all the emails we send out. We sent 250k emails (500kb apiece) over the weekend and we were having trouble with that quantity. It seems some of those email were queued up for retry sending...but we didn't have sufficient disk space for that? Something broke - I'm not sure what.
What I want to do is to find and change the config file that has to do with postfix email retrying - possibly limit this (not sure if this will fix my problem). Or, turn off /limit any way that postfix logs/caches emails so that it won't take up all the disk space when queued up for retry... Again, I'm totally lost here (on both what's going on, and how to fix it). I'm not sure what more information is needed to address this problem
I don't understand this error nor do I know how to solve the issue that is causing the error. Anyone care to comment?
Quote:
Error: Caching enabled but no local cache of //var/cache/yum/updates-newkey/filelists.sqlite.bz2 from updates-newkey
I know JohnVV. "Install a supported version of Fedora, like Fedora 11". This is on a box that has all 11 releases of Fedora installed. It's a toy and I like to play around with it.
I was laughing about klackenfus's post with the ancient RH install, and then work has me dig up an old server that has been out of use for some time. It has some proprietary binaries installed that intentionally tries to hide files to prevent copying (and we are no longer paying for support or have install binaries), so a clean install is not preferable.
Basically it has been out of commission for so long, that the apt-get upgrade DL is larger than the /var partition (apt caches to /var/cache/apt/archives).
I can upgrade the bigger packages manually until I get under the threshold, but then I learn nothing new. So I'm curious if I can redirect the cache of apt to a specified folder either on the command line or via a config setting?
I installed squid cache on my ubuntu server 10.10 and it is work fine but i want to know how to make it cache all files like .exe .mp3 .avi ....etc. and the other thing i want to know is how to make my client take the files from the cache in the full speed. since am using mikrotik system to use pppoe for clients and i match it with my ubuntu squid
i was looking for a way to stop my menus taking a few seconds to load my icons when i first open them and found a few guides suggesting using the gtk-upate-icon-cache command, but with the any colour you like icon theme i'm using (stored in my home folder .icons directory) i kept getting a "gtk-update-icon-cache: The generated cache was invalid." fault i used the inbuilt facility in the acyl script to copy the icons to the usr/share/icons directory and tried the command again, this time using sudo gtk-update-icon-cache --force --ignore-theme-index /usr/share/icons/ACYL_Icon_Theme_0.8.1/ but i still get the same error. i tried with several of the custom icon themes i've installed and only 1 of the first 7 or 8 i tried successfully created the cache.
I want to set a limit on the available RAM in my Linux machine, it currently has 4GB of RAM, and in order to perform some experiments I need the system to recognize and use only 1GB. I don't want to limit the amount of memory to one particular process (like with ulimit), but to the whole system. The OS in Ubuntu 9.10. Somewhere a long time ago (for Fedora) I read about editing grub, so that at boot time the limit is set, it might be something along those lines, but not really sure.
I am running into a scenario where inode utilization (df -i)on a partition is 100% I want know
1) Is there a better way to list the total count of all files in a partition and just display total number of files in each directory in that partition I can get approx total for the entire partition by following commands
ls -Rla | wc -l find -type f | wc -l
whereas ls -Rla gives too lengthy outptut with all the files in each directory
2) How to know inode utilization for each user or system account? There is huge number of files and how to remove it