root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
30 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Mikhail Ramendik
Hello,

I trued to upgrade to 42.3 and the process failed because the root
file system was full. df -h shows it full at 40 gigabytes.

But... with du, I can only find the usage of 15 gigabytes.

Moreover. I found 3 gigabytes in /root that could be deleted, and
promptly deleted them. But df -h is not showing any more space! I am
in the command line under root, no trash system anywhere.

I suspect snapshots are the problem, because I accepted the default of
btrfs for the root filesystem. So I could just delete some old
snapshots.

But how do I list the snapshots? And how do I remove them? Somehow
when I google this I can't find anything.

I mean, I did find

btrfs subvolume list /

and it lists quite a few  lines like:

ID 996 gen 288328 top level 258 path @/.snapshots/558/snapshot

But I can't find a way to delete these snapshots. when I do

btrfs subvolume delete @/.snapshots/558/snapshot

I get "no such file or directory".

So how can I delete snapshots? Even better. how do I find out which
snapshots are made when and include what, so I can delete those I
certainly don't need?

I am tempted to reinstall with an ext4 root file system, but I do not
want to spend all the time needed for a fresh install.
--
Yours, Mikhail Ramendik

Unless explicitly stated, all opinions in my mail are my own and do
not reflect the views of any organization

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Mike Henry
Use snapper to mange the snapshots

"sudo snapper list" will list all of the snapshots. man snapper and
sudo snapper help will provide some further guidance.

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Mikhail Ramendik <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I trued to upgrade to 42.3 and the process failed because the root
> file system was full. df -h shows it full at 40 gigabytes.
>
> But... with du, I can only find the usage of 15 gigabytes.
>
> Moreover. I found 3 gigabytes in /root that could be deleted, and
> promptly deleted them. But df -h is not showing any more space! I am
> in the command line under root, no trash system anywhere.
>
> I suspect snapshots are the problem, because I accepted the default of
> btrfs for the root filesystem. So I could just delete some old
> snapshots.
>
> But how do I list the snapshots? And how do I remove them? Somehow
> when I google this I can't find anything.
>
> I mean, I did find
>
> btrfs subvolume list /
>
> and it lists quite a few  lines like:
>
> ID 996 gen 288328 top level 258 path @/.snapshots/558/snapshot
>
> But I can't find a way to delete these snapshots. when I do
>
> btrfs subvolume delete @/.snapshots/558/snapshot
>
> I get "no such file or directory".
>
> So how can I delete snapshots? Even better. how do I find out which
> snapshots are made when and include what, so I can delete those I
> certainly don't need?
>
> I am tempted to reinstall with an ext4 root file system, but I do not
> want to spend all the time needed for a fresh install.
> --
> Yours, Mikhail Ramendik
>
> Unless explicitly stated, all opinions in my mail are my own and do
> not reflect the views of any organization
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Dr.-Ing. Dieter Jurzitza
In reply to this post by Mikhail Ramendik
Hello Mikhail,
your plan to switch to ext4 is the best thing you can do for private usage.
Unfortunately there is no way to reformat the FS without deleting everything
that is on the partition.
Btrfs shows many many issues for a normal user and tends to exhibit exactly
those problems you are experiencing right now.
Search on the net for ext4 and problems during the last 2 years and do the
same for btrfs for the last two years and you'll understand what I mean.
The main property of btrfs is being broken. And the tools that are at hand are
neither easy to use nor secure. You should never use fsck for example - so,
the command apparently most familiar to anybody should not be used ...
There are many people around that will tell you how wonderful btrfs is - but
no one of them will fix the crap on your harddisk for you the very moment
btrfs starts making trouble.
My two cents after a bunch of reinstalls with ext4 - and never had had any
problems since then ... for years ... guess why.
This does not actually help, I know, as you are kind of stuck, but the best
thing you can do is get a cheap usb stick, format it ext4, put the data from
your root disk on it, reformat your root disk ext4 and copy the data back to
it.
Hope this helps
regards


Dieter

Am Montag, 13. November 2017, 21:18:49 schrieb Mikhail Ramendik:

> Hello,
>
> I trued to upgrade to 42.3 and the process failed because the root
> file system was full. df -h shows it full at 40 gigabytes.
>
> But... with du, I can only find the usage of 15 gigabytes.
>
> Moreover. I found 3 gigabytes in /root that could be deleted, and
> promptly deleted them. But df -h is not showing any more space! I am
> in the command line under root, no trash system anywhere.
>
> I suspect snapshots are the problem, because I accepted the default of
> btrfs for the root filesystem. So I could just delete some old
> snapshots.
>
> But how do I list the snapshots? And how do I remove them? Somehow
> when I google this I can't find anything.
>
> I mean, I did find
>
> btrfs subvolume list /
>
> and it lists quite a few  lines like:
>
> ID 996 gen 288328 top level 258 path @/.snapshots/558/snapshot
>
> But I can't find a way to delete these snapshots. when I do
>
> btrfs subvolume delete @/.snapshots/558/snapshot
>
> I get "no such file or directory".
>
> So how can I delete snapshots? Even better. how do I find out which
> snapshots are made when and include what, so I can delete those I
> certainly don't need?
>
> I am tempted to reinstall with an ext4 root file system, but I do not
> want to spend all the time needed for a fresh install.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dr.-Ing. Dieter Jurzitza                    76131 Karlsruhe


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Mikhail Ramendik
In reply to this post by Mike Henry
Thanks! This works.

I will try to tweak the config so it does not balloon like it did. For
now I have resolved the issue using LVM, by shrinking /home and
increasing / , but really snapshots should be trimmed here - the
default number limit of 10 might be too much?

On 13 November 2017 at 21:30, Mike Henry <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Use snapper to mange the snapshots
>
> "sudo snapper list" will list all of the snapshots. man snapper and
> sudo snapper help will provide some further guidance.
>
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Mikhail Ramendik <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I trued to upgrade to 42.3 and the process failed because the root
>> file system was full. df -h shows it full at 40 gigabytes.
>>
>> But... with du, I can only find the usage of 15 gigabytes.
>>
>> Moreover. I found 3 gigabytes in /root that could be deleted, and
>> promptly deleted them. But df -h is not showing any more space! I am
>> in the command line under root, no trash system anywhere.
>>
>> I suspect snapshots are the problem, because I accepted the default of
>> btrfs for the root filesystem. So I could just delete some old
>> snapshots.
>>
>> But how do I list the snapshots? And how do I remove them? Somehow
>> when I google this I can't find anything.
>>
>> I mean, I did find
>>
>> btrfs subvolume list /
>>
>> and it lists quite a few  lines like:
>>
>> ID 996 gen 288328 top level 258 path @/.snapshots/558/snapshot
>>
>> But I can't find a way to delete these snapshots. when I do
>>
>> btrfs subvolume delete @/.snapshots/558/snapshot
>>
>> I get "no such file or directory".
>>
>> So how can I delete snapshots? Even better. how do I find out which
>> snapshots are made when and include what, so I can delete those I
>> certainly don't need?
>>
>> I am tempted to reinstall with an ext4 root file system, but I do not
>> want to spend all the time needed for a fresh install.
>> --
>> Yours, Mikhail Ramendik
>>
>> Unless explicitly stated, all opinions in my mail are my own and do
>> not reflect the views of any organization
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]
>



--
Yours, Mikhail Ramendik

Unless explicitly stated, all opinions in my mail are my own and do
not reflect the views of any organization

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Rodney Baker-2
In reply to this post by Dr.-Ing. Dieter Jurzitza
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 8:00:33 ACDT Dr.-Ing. Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
> Hello Mikhail,
> your plan to switch to ext4 is the best thing you can do for private usage.

+1

>[...]
>The main property of btrfs is being broken. And the tools that are at hand
> are neither easy to use nor secure. You should never use fsck for example -

+100

Found these;

https://www.linux.com/news/snapper-suses-ultimate-btrfs-snapshot-manager

https://www.suse.com/documentation/sles11/stor_admin/data/
trbl_btrfs_volfull.html

The second is likely to be more useful.

After being burned by exactly the same thing and ending up with a non-bootable
system, I simply banned btrfs from any system managed by me, at least until
the tools have matured and there are sensible installation defaults (or
warnings in big, bold print NOT to accept the defaults during installation).

HTH.
R.

--
==============================================================
Rodney Baker VK5ZTV
[hidden email]
CCNA #CSCO12880208
==============================================================

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

nicholas cunliffe
> Btrfs shows many many issues for a normal user and tends to exhibit exactly those problems you are experiencing right now.

this is not directed at the OP but those who have responded with
prejudice instead of proving support to the actual problem at hand.

Most problems and those currently being 'experienced right now' are
due to user ignorance - specifically: not monitoring space, not
knowing commands to monitor space, not knowing how to deal with
snapshots, not knowing how or implementing default settings.

sudo snapper list
sudo snapper rm xxx-yyy
where xxx-yyy is the numbered range. delete the oldest (except the
root FS 0 and 1 by default if no rollback has occurred). The oldest
take the most space and are the least useful. remove pre and post
pairs together.

after than run a balance and make sure the cron jobs are actually
installed (bug caused cron files to disappear for a while on TW)
sudo /etc/cron.weekly/btrfs-balance

edit configs here, if you have quotas enabled it is effective to set
SPACE_LIMIT= to a lower value
/etc/snapper/configs/root

if you add this to .bashrc you can quickly monitor space before large changes
alias space='sudo btrfs filesystem usage -h /'

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Richard Brown
In reply to this post by Rodney Baker-2
On 14 November 2017 at 00:47, Rodney Baker <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 8:00:33 ACDT Dr.-Ing. Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
>> Hello Mikhail,
>> your plan to switch to ext4 is the best thing you can do for private usage.
>
> +1
>
>>[...]
>>The main property of btrfs is being broken. And the tools that are at hand
>> are neither easy to use nor secure. You should never use fsck for example -
>
> +100
>
> Found these;
>
> https://www.linux.com/news/snapper-suses-ultimate-btrfs-snapshot-manager
>
> https://www.suse.com/documentation/sles11/stor_admin/data/
> trbl_btrfs_volfull.html
>

I personally prefer the openSUSE Wiki for its comprehensive guide to
the common concerns with BTRFS

https://en.opensuse.org/SDB:BTRFS

Since following the above guides I've been comfortable running btrfs
for the last years

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Mathias Homann-2
In reply to this post by nicholas cunliffe


On 14.11.2017 10:05, nicholas cunliffe wrote:
>> Btrfs shows many many issues for a normal user and tends to exhibit exactly those problems you are experiencing right now.
> this is not directed at the OP but those who have responded with
> prejudice instead of proving support to the actual problem at hand.
>
> Most problems and those currently being 'experienced right now' are
> due to user ignorance - specifically: not monitoring space, not
> knowing commands to monitor space, not knowing how to deal with
> snapshots, not knowing how or implementing default settings.

Like he said: "many issues for a normal user", i.e. no good defaults.

> sudo snapper list
> sudo snapper rm xxx-yyy
> where xxx-yyy is the numbered range. delete the oldest (except the
> root FS 0 and 1 by default if no rollback has occurred). The oldest
> take the most space and are the least useful. remove pre and post
> pairs together.
>
> after than run a balance and make sure the cron jobs are actually
> installed (bug caused cron files to disappear for a while on TW)
> sudo /etc/cron.weekly/btrfs-balance
>
> edit configs here, if you have quotas enabled it is effective to set
> SPACE_LIMIT= to a lower value
> /etc/snapper/configs/root
>
> if you add this to .bashrc you can quickly monitor space before large changes
> alias space='sudo btrfs filesystem usage -h /'
>


that is all good and well, but it should not be necessary if the
defaults were good.


Cheers
Mathias


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

nicholas cunliffe
> that is all good and well, but it should not be necessary if the defaults were good.
yes, im all in favour of not having "a lifeboat so big it sinks the
ship". i think they have improved from way back, i would prefer to see
a more minimal snapper config

PS for OP - deleting files on a COW FS does not free space

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Richard Brown
On 14 November 2017 at 11:21, nicholas cunliffe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> that is all good and well, but it should not be necessary if the defaults were good.
> yes, im all in favour of not having "a lifeboat so big it sinks the
> ship". i think they have improved from way back, i would prefer to see
> a more minimal snapper config

We have a more minimal snapper config - based on user feedback we've
already stopped snapper from doing regular snapshots (based on time)

Instead we now ONLY do snapshots triggered by actual administration
tooling (ie. zypper and YaST)

This dramatically reduced the number of snapshots, which are now a
direct function of how much you change your system from the default -
and as more changes bring more risk I think it's reasonable to think
it's a good idea to have more snapshots

We also have a space based automatic cleanup on snapper since Leap 42.3

But as the OP is talking about an upgrade, I think it is likely that
at least some of the above applied to them.
That is unfortunate, but we do not change an existing configuration of
a running system for obvious reasons.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Wol's lists
On 14/11/17 10:28, Richard Brown wrote:
> But as the OP is talking about an upgrade, I think it is likely that
> at least some of the above applied to them.
> That is unfortunate, but we do not change an existing configuration of
> a running system for obvious reasons.

WHAT obvious reasons?

A simple question, at upggrade, of "do you want to accept snapper's new
defaults" might not go amiss.

Okay, overwriting a user's changed settings is a no-go, but if you can
detect that the user hasn't changed the old defaults, upgrading them to
new defaults WITHOUT ASKING is perfectly sensible and okay.

As a gentoo user, I find that rather frustrating when it *sometimes*
updates a config without asking, and sometimes doesn't, asking me
whether I want to do it. If I've never been near the config, and don't
have a clue what it does, why bother asking me!?

Cheers,
Wol

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Andrei Borzenkov
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Wols Lists <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Okay, overwriting a user's changed settings is a no-go, but if you can
> detect that the user hasn't changed the old defaults, upgrading them to
> new defaults WITHOUT ASKING is perfectly sensible and okay.
>

How do you distinguish between user intentionally leaving default
values and user never intending to customize them?

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Richard Brown
On 14 November 2017 at 12:28, Wols Lists <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> That is unfortunate, but we do not change an existing configuration of
>> a running system for obvious reasons.
>
> WHAT obvious reasons?

On 14 November 2017 at 13:20, Andrei Borzenkov <[hidden email]> wrote:
> How do you distinguish between user intentionally leaving default
> values and user never intending to customize them?

Exactly ^ that reason (which I thought was obvious)

We never intentionally break a users running system.
We assume that their current configuration of a running system is
exactly how they like it.
We cannot distinguish between a user intentionally leaving a default
value and a user who didn't know better.
Sadly, zypper doesn't have mind-reading powers, therefore we don't go
changing an existing systems configuration when upgrading.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Wol's lists
On 14/11/17 12:33, Richard Brown wrote:

> On 14 November 2017 at 12:28, Wols Lists <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> That is unfortunate, but we do not change an existing configuration of
>>> a running system for obvious reasons.
>>
>> WHAT obvious reasons?
>
> On 14 November 2017 at 13:20, Andrei Borzenkov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> How do you distinguish between user intentionally leaving default
>> values and user never intending to customize them?
>
> Exactly ^ that reason (which I thought was obvious)

In which case, that's actually a good reason for changing them :-)

The user never intended to customise them. In other words, they want a
default system! You have now (by updating the system, but not the
defaults) left them with a non-standard system :-)
>
> We never intentionally break a users running system.
> We assume that their current configuration of a running system is
> exactly how they like it.
> We cannot distinguish between a user intentionally leaving a default
> value and a user who didn't know better.
> Sadly, zypper doesn't have mind-reading powers, therefore we don't go
> changing an existing systems configuration when upgrading.
>
Point taken. But if we divide users into three categories, there are
those who modify the defaults. That's fine, neither you nor me expect an
update to trample on their changes.

Then there are those people *who know what they are doing* who review
the defaults and choose to leave them alone. My change would "break"
those systems, yes.

Then there are those *who don't have a clue*, who presumably massively
outnumber those who know what they are doing. You would rather break the
*majority* of systems, rather than the minority?

Systemd gets this right, in that the defaults get updated as a matter of
course (okay, I guess there's rarely any need to). Any configuration you
explicitly want, you specify in the user area which by design is not
updated. If you review the defaults, then you can save the (non)-changes
to the user area. That way, they'll override any new defaults. "You have
reviewed the configuration but made no changes. Do you want this
configuration to survive updates unchanged?"

Retrofitting the functionality to YaST might not be easy, but imho
you'll break far fewer systems by having a way for users to say "this is
what I want" and manage the rest automatically, than by allowing
(mis)configured cruft from old versions to accumulate until suddenly a
new version breaks on an option left behind from a long dead version.

Cheers,
Wol

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

jdd@dodin.org
In reply to this post by Richard Brown
Le 14/11/2017 à 13:33, Richard Brown a écrit :

> We never intentionally break a users running system.
(...)

why not use the rpmnew mechanism? that is add a rpmnew file with the
recommended new defaults, leaving the choice to use then or not? I just
verified I have some rpmnew files on my disk, but not for zypper

jdd

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Carlos E. R.-2
In reply to this post by Wol's lists
On 2017-11-14 13:56, Wols Lists wrote:

> On 14/11/17 12:33, Richard Brown wrote:
>> On 14 November 2017 at 12:28, Wols Lists <> wrote:
>>>> That is unfortunate, but we do not change an existing configuration of
>>>> a running system for obvious reasons.
>>>
>>> WHAT obvious reasons?
>>
>> On 14 November 2017 at 13:20, Andrei Borzenkov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> How do you distinguish between user intentionally leaving default
>>> values and user never intending to customize them?
>>
>> Exactly ^ that reason (which I thought was obvious)
>
> In which case, that's actually a good reason for changing them :-)
>
> The user never intended to customise them. In other words, they want a
> default system! You have now (by updating the system, but not the
> defaults) left them with a non-standard system :-)
>>
>> We never intentionally break a users running system.
>> We assume that their current configuration of a running system is
>> exactly how they like it.
>> We cannot distinguish between a user intentionally leaving a default
>> value and a user who didn't know better.
>> Sadly, zypper doesn't have mind-reading powers, therefore we don't go
>> changing an existing systems configuration when upgrading.
>>
> Point taken. But if we divide users into three categories, there are
> those who modify the defaults. That's fine, neither you nor me expect an
> update to trample on their changes.
>
> Then there are those people *who know what they are doing* who review
> the defaults and choose to leave them alone. My change would "break"
> those systems, yes.
>
> Then there are those *who don't have a clue*, who presumably massively
> outnumber those who know what they are doing. You would rather break the
> *majority* of systems, rather than the minority?
>
> Systemd gets this right, in that the defaults get updated as a matter of
> course (okay, I guess there's rarely any need to). Any configuration you
> explicitly want, you specify in the user area which by design is not
> updated. If you review the defaults, then you can save the (non)-changes
> to the user area. That way, they'll override any new defaults. "You have
> reviewed the configuration but made no changes. Do you want this
> configuration to survive updates unchanged?"
>
> Retrofitting the functionality to YaST might not be easy, but imho
> you'll break far fewer systems by having a way for users to say "this is
> what I want" and manage the rest automatically, than by allowing
> (mis)configured cruft from old versions to accumulate until suddenly a
> new version breaks on an option left behind from a long dead version.
IMHO, the user should get the option during a "distribution upgrade" to
get the new defaults for btrfs, like the new volume layout. If this is
not done, systems that are routinely upgraded for years will break.

And no, I do not know how to do that. One more reason that I do not use
btrfs.

--
Cheers / Saludos,

                Carlos E. R.
                (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)


signature.asc (188 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

nicholas cunliffe
In reply to this post by nicholas cunliffe
some users DO want to be bothered by snapshots, I include myself as
one of them. It also includes many TW users for obvious reasons, from
observation it even includes users of other distros who go to the
trouble of installing it themselves.

> He does not want to be told to do complex commands
most issues that arise on forums require "complex commands", the cron
job links are a separate bug (just solved on TW), the balance given
the situation.

> The problem that started this thread would simply not have occured in case ext4 would have been the basis of all.
not buying this argument. for x number of other posts and situations -
'you wouldnt be stuck with a broken system if you had snapshots'

'average users' want to interact and invest in user space (the apps
that give value), they want the plumbing to be hidden. If
btrfs/snapshots do not add value then they are just exposed plumbing,
if they add value they are worth investing in. Snapshots add value on
TW, I dont know about leap.

there is no universal/best backup method.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

David C. Rankin
In reply to this post by nicholas cunliffe
On 11/14/2017 4:05 AM, nicholas cunliffe wrote:
> Most problems and those currently being 'experienced right now' are
> due to user ignorance - specifically: not monitoring space, not
> knowing commands to monitor space, not knowing how to deal with
> snapshots, not knowing how or implementing default settings.
>

To be blunt and non-politically correct, that's just BS.

When YAST is supposed to be the wizard that guides new users through
setup providing defaults for just about everything and hiding the
details behind "Expert" partitioning buttons, it is malarkey, and an ill
placed ad hominem to blame the user for not monitoring what is
mysteriously ballooning storage behind the scenes -- that heretofore has
never been a problem before btrfs became the default filesystem.

To be candid, you can blame the user for failing to monitor disk space
when the cause of the problem is what the user put on the disk filling
it up, but when the problem is the result of YAST defaults that
repeatedly lead to just this type of problem, blaming the user is just
an attempt to avoid responsibility for an imprudent choice of a default
filesystem.

If we are not going to have YAST make good default choices for the new
users, then we certainly should not blame the user or call them
"ignorant" when foreseeable problems based on YAST defaults occur.

--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Andrei Borzenkov
15.11.2017 01:33, David C. Rankin пишет:

> On 11/14/2017 4:05 AM, nicholas cunliffe wrote:
>> Most problems and those currently being 'experienced right now' are
>> due to user ignorance - specifically: not monitoring space, not
>> knowing commands to monitor space, not knowing how to deal with
>> snapshots, not knowing how or implementing default settings.
>>
>
> To be blunt and non-politically correct, that's just BS.
>
> When YAST is supposed to be the wizard that guides new users through
> setup providing defaults for just about everything and hiding the
> details behind "Expert" partitioning buttons, it is malarkey, and an ill
> placed ad hominem to blame the user for not monitoring what is
> mysteriously ballooning storage behind the scenes -- that heretofore has
> never been a problem before btrfs became the default filesystem.
>
> To be candid, you can blame the user for failing to monitor disk space
> when the cause of the problem is what the user put on the disk filling
> it up, but when the problem is the result of YAST defaults that
> repeatedly lead to just this type of problem, blaming the user is just
> an attempt to avoid responsibility for an imprudent choice of a default
> filesystem.
>
> If we are not going to have YAST make good default choices for the new
> users, then we certainly should not blame the user or call them
> "ignorant" when foreseeable problems based on YAST defaults occur.
>

What should YaST defaults be? You apparently are in possession of silver
bullet, why keep it secret? I am sure developers will immediately
implement your suggestion.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: root full but du not showing why - snapshots? Can't even free up

Carlos E. R.-2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



On Wednesday, 2017-11-15 at 06:28 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

> 15.11.2017 01:33, David C. Rankin пишет:
>> On 11/14/2017 4:05 AM, nicholas cunliffe wrote:
>>> Most problems and those currently being 'experienced right now' are
>>> due to user ignorance - specifically: not monitoring space, not
>>> knowing commands to monitor space, not knowing how to deal with
>>> snapshots, not knowing how or implementing default settings.
>>>
>>
>> To be blunt and non-politically correct, that's just BS.
>>
>> When YAST is supposed to be the wizard that guides new users through
>> setup providing defaults for just about everything and hiding the
>> details behind "Expert" partitioning buttons, it is malarkey, and an ill
>> placed ad hominem to blame the user for not monitoring what is
>> mysteriously ballooning storage behind the scenes -- that heretofore has
>> never been a problem before btrfs became the default filesystem.
>>
>> To be candid, you can blame the user for failing to monitor disk space
>> when the cause of the problem is what the user put on the disk filling
>> it up, but when the problem is the result of YAST defaults that
>> repeatedly lead to just this type of problem, blaming the user is just
>> an attempt to avoid responsibility for an imprudent choice of a default
>> filesystem.
>>
>> If we are not going to have YAST make good default choices for the new
>> users, then we certainly should not blame the user or call them
>> "ignorant" when foreseeable problems based on YAST defaults occur.
>>
>
> What should YaST defaults be? You apparently are in possession of silver
> bullet, why keep it secret? I am sure developers will immediately
> implement your suggestion.
You are correct, but David also has a point, but not nicely drawn :-)

The thing is, we can not blame the fault on "user ignorance" if a tool
such as YAST did not use good defaults for a plain user. We, as users,
expect YAST to make life easy for us, without needing to be experts.

Or in other words: if a filesystem requires the user to become
knowledgeable in "arcane settings and tools", then it is not a good
default choice.

- --
Cheers,
        Carlos E. R.
        (from openSUSE 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAloLt/oACgkQtTMYHG2NR9UqMQCfX44YCHz8LpEAb//iHBBpXt9a
V50AnjPmIsuriKqUYTAzExvA7xw+t+SN
=g9uY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
12