 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Our server got a 120 Gb disk.
Data files are stored on a 100 Gb partition of it.
That partition is NTFS, cluster size 4 Kb.
The files in that partition sums up to 40 Gb (which,
not surprisingly, is also the size of the nightly
backup)
Today, someone had a problem to save a file, and I've
been horrified to see that Windows Server 2003 tells
me there's only 2 Mb left on the partition !
I've run a defrag, which freed 250 Mb.
WHERE IS THE REST ? (there should be 60 Gb free !)
What could it be ? I don't know what to do...
Fabien.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Have you tried to do a search for large files? I'd start there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Fa3ien wrote:
> Our server got a 120 Gb disk.
>
> Data files are stored on a 100 Gb partition of it.
> That partition is NTFS, cluster size 4 Kb.
>
> The files in that partition sums up to 40 Gb (which,
> not surprisingly, is also the size of the nightly
> backup)
>
> Today, someone had a problem to save a file, and I've
> been horrified to see that Windows Server 2003 tells
> me there's only 2 Mb left on the partition !
>
> I've run a defrag, which freed 250 Mb.
>
> WHERE IS THE REST ? (there should be 60 Gb free !)
>
> What could it be ? I don't know what to do...
Some of it could conceivably be "slack space". (A file can only be an
integer number of blocks long. The remaining space isn't shown in the
"file size", yet cannot be used for any other data because a block can
only belong to one file. If you look at file properties, you will see a
"file size" and a larger "disk on disk", which includes the slack space.)
Some more of it could be for the directory structure. (Directories take
up space too!)
If you have vast numbers of really tiny files, that might well eat up a
lot of free size without registering as much "used space". (IIRC,
*really* tiny files get inlined into the directory structure itself to
reduce slash space. I forget what the size limit is though.)
Met more of it might be things like reversed file allocations (rare),
MTF (master file table), System Volume Information, Restore Points, etc.
Do you have that Previous Versions option switched on?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Invisible
Subject: Re: missing disk space on server, need help
Date: 9 Nov 2007 08:46:47
Message: <473464c7@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Some of it could conceivably be "slack space". (A file can only be an
> integer number of blocks long. The remaining space isn't shown in the
> "file size", yet cannot be used for any other data because a block can
> only belong to one file. If you look at file properties, you will see a
> "file size" and a larger "disk on disk", which includes the slack space.)
I meant, of course, "size on disk"...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I've run a defrag, which freed 250 Mb.
Defrags free disk space??
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
message de news: 473472c5$1@news.povray.org...
>> I've run a defrag, which freed 250 Mb.
>
> Defrags free disk space??
I am not an expert but maybe if it optimizes disk occupation by filling
blocks instead of letting empty portions of blocks.
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:35:14 -0000, Fa3ien
<fab### [at] yourshoes skynetbe> did spake, saying:
> Our server got a 120 Gb disk.
>
> Data files are stored on a 100 Gb partition of it.
> That partition is NTFS, cluster size 4 Kb.
>
> The files in that partition sums up to 40 Gb (which,
> not surprisingly, is also the size of the nightly
> backup)
>
> Today, someone had a problem to save a file, and I've
> been horrified to see that Windows Server 2003 tells
> me there's only 2 Mb left on the partition !
>
> I've run a defrag, which freed 250 Mb.
>
> WHERE IS THE REST ? (there should be 60 Gb free !)
>
> What could it be ? I don't know what to do...
Asking the obvious I'm assuming that the swap file isn't on the same
partition?
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook wrote:
> Asking the obvious I'm assuming that the swap file isn't on the same
> partition?
Even if it is, that would show up as a "file" and would be counted with
all the other files in the "40 GB" number. (Although presumably not the
backup size.) Also, the swap file doesn't just change size of its own
accord. Certainly not by 60 GB. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 09 Nov 2007 16:10:20 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did
spake, saying:
> Phil Cook wrote:
>
>> Asking the obvious I'm assuming that the swap file isn't on the same
>> partition?
>
> Even if it is, that would show up as a "file" and would be counted with
> all the other files in the "40 GB" number. (Although presumably not the
> backup size.)
Depends how you're counting. If it's sitting on its hidden lonesome in
root and you just total the folders. Wouldn't show up on a file size
search either unless you specifically include hidden system files.
> Also, the swap file doesn't just change size of its own accord.
Well no it changes when it needs to.
> Certainly not by 60 GB. ;-)
Why not unless you've set a maximum limit.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kyle schrieb:
> Have you tried to do a search for large files? I'd start there.
>
nice tool to get an overview:
http://w3.win.tue.nl/nl/onderzoek/onderzoek_informatica/visualization/sequoiaview//
but it won't help, if those 60GB are no files at all, as Fabien suggests...
kk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
