On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 15:04, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> Scratch that...it just dropped back down about an hour ago. I wonder why
> that would be? I mounted a loopback device around that time. Could that
> have anything to do with it?
About the only thing which would shrink it is a memory shortage, one
of the things this can cause is a shrink of the inode cache.
> On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 14:53, Steve Lord wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 14:49, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> > > That's what it looked like to me as well, but df -i still shows a
> > decent
> > > percentage of inodes free. That's what I'm getting wrapped around
> > right
> > > now. I wasn't sure if it was relating to how many inodes are/were
> > used,
> > > or if data extending to a certain number of blocks was making the
> > other
> > > inodes unuseable. I've never heard of that happening, but I was
> > curious
> > > just the same.
> > I am pretty sure these numbers refer to in memory inode pools, not to
> > on disk inode availability. Besides which when xfs reports how many
> > inodes are free, it is reporting how many inodes could be created in
> > the filesystem - which at 256 bytes per inode is usually a lot.
> > Steve
> > --
> > Steve Lord voice: +1-651-683-3511
> > Principal Engineer, Filesystem Software email: lord@xxxxxxx
> Austin Gonyou
> Systems Architect, CCNA
> Coremetrics, Inc.
> Phone: 512-698-7250
> email: austin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it."
> Latin Proverb
Steve Lord voice: +1-651-683-3511
Principal Engineer, Filesystem Software email: lord@xxxxxxx