Why have I lost 12MB to lost+found ?

Why have I lost 12MB to lost+found ?

Post by Michael He » Thu, 24 Jun 1993 02:44:16



I can not understand why the size of the lost+found directory is 12MB
(12288 blocks). Yet when I do ls -a in lost+found I get only the two
entries . and ..
running e2fsck does not find any problems.
Any insight ?
Thanks again,
--Michael
 
 
 

Why have I lost 12MB to lost+found ?

Post by Michael O'Reil » Thu, 24 Jun 1993 11:49:32


: I can not understand why the size of the lost+found directory is 12MB
: (12288 blocks). Yet when I do ls -a in lost+found I get only the two

That isn't blocks, thats bytes. So it uses 12K, NOT 12 meg.
'ls' shows the byte size, not the block size.

try 'du -s /lost+found'. It should give you back '12'.

: entries . and ..
: running e2fsck does not find any problems.
: Any insight ?
: Thanks again,
: --Michael

Michael.

 
 
 

Why have I lost 12MB to lost+found ?

Post by Jay I Ch » Thu, 24 Jun 1993 20:19:31



>I can not understand why the size of the lost+found directory is 12MB
>(12288 blocks). Yet when I do ls -a in lost+found I get only the two
>entries . and ..
>running e2fsck does not find any problems.
>Any insight ?
>Thanks again,
>--Michael

I had a similar problem when I made a partition with exact multiples
of 8 Megs (48 MB total).
Just after mke2fs, df claimed that nearly 20% of total space was
used already!
Then I decresed a few blocks (just below 8 Meg boundary),
and the reserved size was dropped to 1 to 2 Meg bytes.
Maybe a common problem with mke2fs (or e2fs)?

Jay

--
I. Choe, Physics FM-15, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195

 
 
 

Why have I lost 12MB to lost+found ?

Post by Rogier Wol » Sat, 26 Jun 1993 01:09:14




: Just after mke2fs, df claimed that nearly 20% of total space was
: used already!
: Then I decresed a few blocks (just below 8 Meg boundary),
: and the reserved size was dropped to 1 to 2 Meg bytes.
: Maybe a common problem with mke2fs (or e2fs)?

Let me throw in a "bug report". We tried making a file system on
a new SCSI disk. It was slightly larger than what I'm used to, when working
with Linux: It was 425Mb. It seems that it was also larger than what mke2fs
was used to.... It crashed with an "out of memory" error. It seems
that mke2fs builds up some datastructures in memory before writing everything
to disk.

I don't consider it "You're nuts if you want to do that" if I want to
run mke2fs on an 8Mb machine when I haven't yet configured any swapspace.
Similarly 400Mb isn't really THAT much. (it did manage 300Mb by the way...)

                                        Roger.

--
****   a 486 in V86 mode is like a VW buggy with a 6 liter V12 motor.  ****

 
 
 

Why have I lost 12MB to lost+found ?

Post by Matthias Urlic » Sat, 26 Jun 1993 06:23:45




Quote:

> Let me throw in a "bug report". We tried making a file system on
> a new SCSI disk. It was slightly larger than what I'm used to, when working
> with Linux: It was 425Mb. It seems that it was also larger than what mke2fs
> was used to.... It crashed with an "out of memory" error. It seems
> that mke2fs builds up some datastructures in memory before writing everything
> to disk.

Just use the current version of mke2fs. That bug was fixed in 0.3.

--
Augustine's Law Number XII:
It costs a lot to build bad products.
                 -- Norman R. Augustine, President and CEO, Martin Marietta
--

Humboldtstrasse 7 -- 7500 Karlsruhe 1 -- Germany  --  +49-721-9612521     \o)/

 
 
 

Why have I lost 12MB to lost+found ?

Post by Jimmy Hua » Mon, 28 Jun 1993 19:01:37





>> Let me throw in a "bug report". We tried making a file system on
>> a new SCSI disk. It was slightly larger than what I'm used to, when working
>> with Linux: It was 425Mb. It seems that it was also larger than what mke2fs
>> was used to.... It crashed with an "out of memory" error. It seems
>> that mke2fs builds up some datastructures in memory before writing everything
>> to disk.

   You could add swap before doing a mke2fs, yeah 8 Megs ram should still be
        more than enough...

Quote:

>Just use the current version of mke2fs. That bug was fixed in 0.3.

Yes, this version uses much less memory.  
As a note, the current SLS version is still stuck in .2c, so don't get
it from there.

Jimmy


>Humboldtstrasse 7 -- 7500 Karlsruhe 1 -- Germany  --  +49-721-9612521     \o)/