Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 07:48:45 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, fbsd@dannysplace.net, torbjoern@gmail.com Subject: Re: Strange ZFS problem, filesystem claims to be full when clearly not full Message-ID: <20100930144845.GA19926@icarus.home.lan> In-Reply-To: <201009301438.o8UEckoY019473@lurza.secnetix.de> References: <4CA45444.6070002@dannysplace.net> <201009301438.o8UEckoY019473@lurza.secnetix.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 04:38:46PM +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote: > Danny Carroll <fbsd@dannysplace.net> wrote: > > [...] > > It certainly smells like a process still writing to a file that is unlinked. > > I wonder if it would show up with lsof. > > If it's a file that was unlinked that is still held open by > a process, then lsof will definitely list it. The command > > # lsof +L1 > > lists all open files with a link count of zero. You can > restrict it to a certain file system like this: > > # lsof +aL1 /var > > Of course, lsof won't list the file name because the file > doesn't have a name anymore. But it lists the process by > name, PID and user, the file system and the file size. Can someone explain how use of lsof in this regard is different than use of fstat(1) like I originally mentioned? Does lsof do something more thorough or differently that what fstat does? -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100930144845.GA19926>