Hi All,
I'm cureous as to why the DISK-MONITOR class has the slots: DISK-USED & INODES-USED whose accessors are DISK-FREE and INODES-FREE and initargs are :DISK-FREE and :INODES-FREE.
This seems a *tad* confusing to me, especially whereas df reports used blocks and available blocks and the DISK-USED slot seems to be storing the *free* blocks.
The INODES-USED slot seems to be, at this point, unused, so I'm not sure if it is also backwards :) The naming does seem a bit strange as well. :)
Jim
James E. Prewett Jim@Prewett.org download@hpc.unm.edu Systems Team Leader LoGS: http://www.hpc.unm.edu/~download/LoGS/ Designated Security Officer OpenPGP key: pub 1024D/31816D93 HPC Systems Engineer III UNM HPC 505.277.8210
Jim Prewett writes:
Hi All,
I'm cureous as to why the DISK-MONITOR class has the slots: DISK-USED & INODES-USED whose accessors are DISK-FREE and INODES-FREE and initargs are :DISK-FREE and :INODES-FREE.
This seems a *tad* confusing to me, especially whereas df reports used blocks and available blocks and the DISK-USED slot seems to be storing the *free* blocks.
I suspect this is one of those lovely artefacts that comes from "start coding, then think". It's probably best to just rename the slots, as I believe accessors and initargs all are "...-FREE"
The INODES-USED slot seems to be, at this point, unused, so I'm not sure if it is also backwards :) The naming does seem a bit strange as well. :)
They are, they possibly shouldn't be. Though inode starvation is much less common than storage starvation (unless you use lots of small files, with a file system that has an inode allocation for a much larger "average file" size).
//Ingvar
-
Ingvar -
Jim Prewett