Ubuntu show wrong disk sizes, how to solve it?Need to reboot twice when Ubuntu 12.04.1 mdadm RAID1 degradedThe volume boot has only 40mb disk space remainingDrive failure in Raid1. Can't replaceBreaking boot-up Raid 1 array into two independent drivesChanging disk space allocationIs it possible to add some disk space to ubuntu installed drive?if then what is the way?RAID disk size is less than display in SSA on HP Proliant DL380 Gen10Ubuntu 17.10 UEFI with raidMultiple Hard disks raid 1 adding space?Help figuring out what's taking up disk space
Find a text string in a file and output only the rest of the text that follows it?
split large formula in align
A verb for when some rights are not violated?
Is there a way to improve my grade after graduation?
Generate a random point outside a given rectangle within a map
Repeated! Factorials!
Can I enter a rental property without giving notice if I'm afraid a tenant may be hurt?
How to switch an 80286 from protected to real mode?
Is there a way to prevent the production team from messing up my paper?
Traveling from Germany to other countries by train?
Why do cheap flights with a layover get more expensive when you split them up into separate flights?
Did Captain America make out with his niece?
What filaments allow air to pass but not water vapor?
How easy is it to get a gun illegally in the United States?
I was contacted by a private bank overseas to get my inheritance
Write The Shortest Program To Check If A Binary Tree Is Balanced
Can attackers change the public key of certificate during the SSL handshake
Probably terminated or laid off soon; confront or not?
Definitional equality of two propositions about propositional equality
Why do proponents of guns oppose gun competency tests?
How to sort List<T> in c#
Nested Unlocked Packages requires Installation of Base Packages?
Can a Hogwarts student refuse the Sorting Hat's decision?
How many years before enough atoms of your body are replaced to survive the sudden disappearance of the original body’s atoms?
Ubuntu show wrong disk sizes, how to solve it?
Need to reboot twice when Ubuntu 12.04.1 mdadm RAID1 degradedThe volume boot has only 40mb disk space remainingDrive failure in Raid1. Can't replaceBreaking boot-up Raid 1 array into two independent drivesChanging disk space allocationIs it possible to add some disk space to ubuntu installed drive?if then what is the way?RAID disk size is less than display in SSA on HP Proliant DL380 Gen10Ubuntu 17.10 UEFI with raidMultiple Hard disks raid 1 adding space?Help figuring out what's taking up disk space
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I have a server with these characteristics:
CPU: Intel Core i7-2600
PLUSRAID Controller 4-Port SATA PCI-E - Adaptec 5405
One each, SATA SSD, 240 GB
Two each, SATA HDDs, 3.0 TB Enterprise
Two each, 8 GB DDR3 RAM
I installed Ubuntu on it, but it shows the space such as this, far less than the true capacity:
root@ns1 /boot # lsblk
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sdb 8:16 1 238.4G 0 disk
├─sdb2 8:18 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sdb3 8:19 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sdb1 8:17 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
sda 8:0 1 2.7T 0 disk
├─sda2 8:2 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sda3 8:3 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sda1 8:1 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
and
root@ns1 /boot # df -lh
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
udev 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev
tmpfs 1.6G 5.3M 1.6G 1% /run
/dev/md2 226G 17G 198G 8% /
tmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev/shm
tmpfs 5.0M 0 5.0M 0% /run/lock
tmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /sys/fs/cgroup
/dev/md1 488M 176M 287M 38% /boot
tmpfs 1.6G 0 1.6G 0% /run/user/0
I don't seem to be using all the space available on the sda disk at all, the two 3 terabytes disks.
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks!
partitioning hard-drive raid
New contributor
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I have a server with these characteristics:
CPU: Intel Core i7-2600
PLUSRAID Controller 4-Port SATA PCI-E - Adaptec 5405
One each, SATA SSD, 240 GB
Two each, SATA HDDs, 3.0 TB Enterprise
Two each, 8 GB DDR3 RAM
I installed Ubuntu on it, but it shows the space such as this, far less than the true capacity:
root@ns1 /boot # lsblk
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sdb 8:16 1 238.4G 0 disk
├─sdb2 8:18 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sdb3 8:19 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sdb1 8:17 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
sda 8:0 1 2.7T 0 disk
├─sda2 8:2 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sda3 8:3 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sda1 8:1 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
and
root@ns1 /boot # df -lh
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
udev 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev
tmpfs 1.6G 5.3M 1.6G 1% /run
/dev/md2 226G 17G 198G 8% /
tmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev/shm
tmpfs 5.0M 0 5.0M 0% /run/lock
tmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /sys/fs/cgroup
/dev/md1 488M 176M 287M 38% /boot
tmpfs 1.6G 0 1.6G 0% /run/user/0
I don't seem to be using all the space available on the sda disk at all, the two 3 terabytes disks.
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks!
partitioning hard-drive raid
New contributor
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
What is wrong ?
– Soren A
10 hours ago
Thanks Soren, you've pointed something out I hadn't even noticed. So the 3TB disk(s) are there in lsblk but the total capacity I'm allowed to use like this is far less than 3TB.
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
2
One problem I see here. You did a RAID 1 (mirrored) on a 3TB drive and a 240GB drive. The problem is that the Mirrored RAID will only be at the size of the SMALLEST drive so you will only get 240GB out of 3TB. Destroy your RAID and do them as separate drives but you will lose data so backup first.
– Terrance
9 hours ago
add a comment |
I have a server with these characteristics:
CPU: Intel Core i7-2600
PLUSRAID Controller 4-Port SATA PCI-E - Adaptec 5405
One each, SATA SSD, 240 GB
Two each, SATA HDDs, 3.0 TB Enterprise
Two each, 8 GB DDR3 RAM
I installed Ubuntu on it, but it shows the space such as this, far less than the true capacity:
root@ns1 /boot # lsblk
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sdb 8:16 1 238.4G 0 disk
├─sdb2 8:18 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sdb3 8:19 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sdb1 8:17 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
sda 8:0 1 2.7T 0 disk
├─sda2 8:2 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sda3 8:3 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sda1 8:1 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
and
root@ns1 /boot # df -lh
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
udev 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev
tmpfs 1.6G 5.3M 1.6G 1% /run
/dev/md2 226G 17G 198G 8% /
tmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev/shm
tmpfs 5.0M 0 5.0M 0% /run/lock
tmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /sys/fs/cgroup
/dev/md1 488M 176M 287M 38% /boot
tmpfs 1.6G 0 1.6G 0% /run/user/0
I don't seem to be using all the space available on the sda disk at all, the two 3 terabytes disks.
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks!
partitioning hard-drive raid
New contributor
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I have a server with these characteristics:
CPU: Intel Core i7-2600
PLUSRAID Controller 4-Port SATA PCI-E - Adaptec 5405
One each, SATA SSD, 240 GB
Two each, SATA HDDs, 3.0 TB Enterprise
Two each, 8 GB DDR3 RAM
I installed Ubuntu on it, but it shows the space such as this, far less than the true capacity:
root@ns1 /boot # lsblk
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sdb 8:16 1 238.4G 0 disk
├─sdb2 8:18 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sdb3 8:19 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sdb1 8:17 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
sda 8:0 1 2.7T 0 disk
├─sda2 8:2 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sda3 8:3 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sda1 8:1 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
and
root@ns1 /boot # df -lh
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
udev 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev
tmpfs 1.6G 5.3M 1.6G 1% /run
/dev/md2 226G 17G 198G 8% /
tmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev/shm
tmpfs 5.0M 0 5.0M 0% /run/lock
tmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /sys/fs/cgroup
/dev/md1 488M 176M 287M 38% /boot
tmpfs 1.6G 0 1.6G 0% /run/user/0
I don't seem to be using all the space available on the sda disk at all, the two 3 terabytes disks.
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks!
partitioning hard-drive raid
partitioning hard-drive raid
New contributor
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 6 hours ago
K7AAY
4,4373 gold badges18 silver badges45 bronze badges
4,4373 gold badges18 silver badges45 bronze badges
New contributor
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 10 hours ago
Lex ThoonenLex Thoonen
212 bronze badges
212 bronze badges
New contributor
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
What is wrong ?
– Soren A
10 hours ago
Thanks Soren, you've pointed something out I hadn't even noticed. So the 3TB disk(s) are there in lsblk but the total capacity I'm allowed to use like this is far less than 3TB.
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
2
One problem I see here. You did a RAID 1 (mirrored) on a 3TB drive and a 240GB drive. The problem is that the Mirrored RAID will only be at the size of the SMALLEST drive so you will only get 240GB out of 3TB. Destroy your RAID and do them as separate drives but you will lose data so backup first.
– Terrance
9 hours ago
add a comment |
1
What is wrong ?
– Soren A
10 hours ago
Thanks Soren, you've pointed something out I hadn't even noticed. So the 3TB disk(s) are there in lsblk but the total capacity I'm allowed to use like this is far less than 3TB.
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
2
One problem I see here. You did a RAID 1 (mirrored) on a 3TB drive and a 240GB drive. The problem is that the Mirrored RAID will only be at the size of the SMALLEST drive so you will only get 240GB out of 3TB. Destroy your RAID and do them as separate drives but you will lose data so backup first.
– Terrance
9 hours ago
1
1
What is wrong ?
– Soren A
10 hours ago
What is wrong ?
– Soren A
10 hours ago
Thanks Soren, you've pointed something out I hadn't even noticed. So the 3TB disk(s) are there in lsblk but the total capacity I'm allowed to use like this is far less than 3TB.
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
Thanks Soren, you've pointed something out I hadn't even noticed. So the 3TB disk(s) are there in lsblk but the total capacity I'm allowed to use like this is far less than 3TB.
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
2
2
One problem I see here. You did a RAID 1 (mirrored) on a 3TB drive and a 240GB drive. The problem is that the Mirrored RAID will only be at the size of the SMALLEST drive so you will only get 240GB out of 3TB. Destroy your RAID and do them as separate drives but you will lose data so backup first.
– Terrance
9 hours ago
One problem I see here. You did a RAID 1 (mirrored) on a 3TB drive and a 240GB drive. The problem is that the Mirrored RAID will only be at the size of the SMALLEST drive so you will only get 240GB out of 3TB. Destroy your RAID and do them as separate drives but you will lose data so backup first.
– Terrance
9 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
It looks like that you have made raid1 (mirror) between partitions on your SSD and HDD. This is not best practice, since it more or less restricts performance to that of the slowest disk.
You can see that /boot, / and [ SWAP ] is defined on partitions on both /dev/sda and /dev/sdb.
sdb 8:16 1 238.4G 0 disk
├─sdb2 8:18 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sdb3 8:19 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sdb1 8:17 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
sda 8:0 1 2.7T 0 disk
├─sda2 8:2 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sda3 8:3 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sda1 8:1 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
I would recommend that you reinstall Ubuntu using only SSD for /boot, / and SWAP. If yopu really want a raid1/mirror setup, you should buy one more 240 GB SSD, so you mirror between similar type and size disks.
Anyway .. if you take a look at your disks with gparted (or fdisk -l) you should see a huge unallocated amount of data on /dev/sda.
add a comment |
The reason why your "3,0 TB" drive (sda) shows up as 2.7T is most likely due to different units being used.
The size is probably about 2.7 Tebibyte, which is approximately the same as 3.0 TB.
You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tebibyte
Thank you, but still, it seems like this I only have access to 230 GB, it would be nice if I could use the 2.7 TB
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
1
@LexThoonen You do have access to 240GB. Rundmesg | grep blocksin a terminal and you will see something like[ 3.989812] sd 4:0:0:0: [sde] 468862128 512-byte logical blocks: (240 GB/224 GiB)which shows that you are seeing theGiBof the drive and not theGB. The 3TB drive shows up like[ 3.462108] sd 10:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.73 TiB)
– Terrance
9 hours ago
add a comment |
lsblk shows all disk partitions, while df -lh only shows your mounted partitions.
1
Don't do that .. sda2 seems to be a part of a raid1 (mirror) ...
– Soren A
9 hours ago
You are right. I removed the example.
– user3140225
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1163809%2fubuntu-show-wrong-disk-sizes-how-to-solve-it%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It looks like that you have made raid1 (mirror) between partitions on your SSD and HDD. This is not best practice, since it more or less restricts performance to that of the slowest disk.
You can see that /boot, / and [ SWAP ] is defined on partitions on both /dev/sda and /dev/sdb.
sdb 8:16 1 238.4G 0 disk
├─sdb2 8:18 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sdb3 8:19 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sdb1 8:17 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
sda 8:0 1 2.7T 0 disk
├─sda2 8:2 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sda3 8:3 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sda1 8:1 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
I would recommend that you reinstall Ubuntu using only SSD for /boot, / and SWAP. If yopu really want a raid1/mirror setup, you should buy one more 240 GB SSD, so you mirror between similar type and size disks.
Anyway .. if you take a look at your disks with gparted (or fdisk -l) you should see a huge unallocated amount of data on /dev/sda.
add a comment |
It looks like that you have made raid1 (mirror) between partitions on your SSD and HDD. This is not best practice, since it more or less restricts performance to that of the slowest disk.
You can see that /boot, / and [ SWAP ] is defined on partitions on both /dev/sda and /dev/sdb.
sdb 8:16 1 238.4G 0 disk
├─sdb2 8:18 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sdb3 8:19 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sdb1 8:17 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
sda 8:0 1 2.7T 0 disk
├─sda2 8:2 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sda3 8:3 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sda1 8:1 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
I would recommend that you reinstall Ubuntu using only SSD for /boot, / and SWAP. If yopu really want a raid1/mirror setup, you should buy one more 240 GB SSD, so you mirror between similar type and size disks.
Anyway .. if you take a look at your disks with gparted (or fdisk -l) you should see a huge unallocated amount of data on /dev/sda.
add a comment |
It looks like that you have made raid1 (mirror) between partitions on your SSD and HDD. This is not best practice, since it more or less restricts performance to that of the slowest disk.
You can see that /boot, / and [ SWAP ] is defined on partitions on both /dev/sda and /dev/sdb.
sdb 8:16 1 238.4G 0 disk
├─sdb2 8:18 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sdb3 8:19 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sdb1 8:17 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
sda 8:0 1 2.7T 0 disk
├─sda2 8:2 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sda3 8:3 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sda1 8:1 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
I would recommend that you reinstall Ubuntu using only SSD for /boot, / and SWAP. If yopu really want a raid1/mirror setup, you should buy one more 240 GB SSD, so you mirror between similar type and size disks.
Anyway .. if you take a look at your disks with gparted (or fdisk -l) you should see a huge unallocated amount of data on /dev/sda.
It looks like that you have made raid1 (mirror) between partitions on your SSD and HDD. This is not best practice, since it more or less restricts performance to that of the slowest disk.
You can see that /boot, / and [ SWAP ] is defined on partitions on both /dev/sda and /dev/sdb.
sdb 8:16 1 238.4G 0 disk
├─sdb2 8:18 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sdb3 8:19 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sdb1 8:17 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
sda 8:0 1 2.7T 0 disk
├─sda2 8:2 1 512M 0 part
│ └─md1 9:1 0 511.4M 0 raid1 /boot
├─sda3 8:3 1 229.9G 0 part
│ └─md2 9:2 0 229.8G 0 raid1 /
└─sda1 8:1 1 8G 0 part
└─md0 9:0 0 8G 0 raid1 [SWAP]
I would recommend that you reinstall Ubuntu using only SSD for /boot, / and SWAP. If yopu really want a raid1/mirror setup, you should buy one more 240 GB SSD, so you mirror between similar type and size disks.
Anyway .. if you take a look at your disks with gparted (or fdisk -l) you should see a huge unallocated amount of data on /dev/sda.
answered 9 hours ago
Soren ASoren A
3,8091 gold badge11 silver badges26 bronze badges
3,8091 gold badge11 silver badges26 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
The reason why your "3,0 TB" drive (sda) shows up as 2.7T is most likely due to different units being used.
The size is probably about 2.7 Tebibyte, which is approximately the same as 3.0 TB.
You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tebibyte
Thank you, but still, it seems like this I only have access to 230 GB, it would be nice if I could use the 2.7 TB
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
1
@LexThoonen You do have access to 240GB. Rundmesg | grep blocksin a terminal and you will see something like[ 3.989812] sd 4:0:0:0: [sde] 468862128 512-byte logical blocks: (240 GB/224 GiB)which shows that you are seeing theGiBof the drive and not theGB. The 3TB drive shows up like[ 3.462108] sd 10:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.73 TiB)
– Terrance
9 hours ago
add a comment |
The reason why your "3,0 TB" drive (sda) shows up as 2.7T is most likely due to different units being used.
The size is probably about 2.7 Tebibyte, which is approximately the same as 3.0 TB.
You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tebibyte
Thank you, but still, it seems like this I only have access to 230 GB, it would be nice if I could use the 2.7 TB
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
1
@LexThoonen You do have access to 240GB. Rundmesg | grep blocksin a terminal and you will see something like[ 3.989812] sd 4:0:0:0: [sde] 468862128 512-byte logical blocks: (240 GB/224 GiB)which shows that you are seeing theGiBof the drive and not theGB. The 3TB drive shows up like[ 3.462108] sd 10:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.73 TiB)
– Terrance
9 hours ago
add a comment |
The reason why your "3,0 TB" drive (sda) shows up as 2.7T is most likely due to different units being used.
The size is probably about 2.7 Tebibyte, which is approximately the same as 3.0 TB.
You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tebibyte
The reason why your "3,0 TB" drive (sda) shows up as 2.7T is most likely due to different units being used.
The size is probably about 2.7 Tebibyte, which is approximately the same as 3.0 TB.
You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tebibyte
answered 10 hours ago
EliasElias
3861 silver badge12 bronze badges
3861 silver badge12 bronze badges
Thank you, but still, it seems like this I only have access to 230 GB, it would be nice if I could use the 2.7 TB
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
1
@LexThoonen You do have access to 240GB. Rundmesg | grep blocksin a terminal and you will see something like[ 3.989812] sd 4:0:0:0: [sde] 468862128 512-byte logical blocks: (240 GB/224 GiB)which shows that you are seeing theGiBof the drive and not theGB. The 3TB drive shows up like[ 3.462108] sd 10:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.73 TiB)
– Terrance
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Thank you, but still, it seems like this I only have access to 230 GB, it would be nice if I could use the 2.7 TB
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
1
@LexThoonen You do have access to 240GB. Rundmesg | grep blocksin a terminal and you will see something like[ 3.989812] sd 4:0:0:0: [sde] 468862128 512-byte logical blocks: (240 GB/224 GiB)which shows that you are seeing theGiBof the drive and not theGB. The 3TB drive shows up like[ 3.462108] sd 10:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.73 TiB)
– Terrance
9 hours ago
Thank you, but still, it seems like this I only have access to 230 GB, it would be nice if I could use the 2.7 TB
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
Thank you, but still, it seems like this I only have access to 230 GB, it would be nice if I could use the 2.7 TB
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
1
1
@LexThoonen You do have access to 240GB. Run
dmesg | grep blocks in a terminal and you will see something like [ 3.989812] sd 4:0:0:0: [sde] 468862128 512-byte logical blocks: (240 GB/224 GiB) which shows that you are seeing the GiB of the drive and not the GB. The 3TB drive shows up like [ 3.462108] sd 10:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.73 TiB)– Terrance
9 hours ago
@LexThoonen You do have access to 240GB. Run
dmesg | grep blocks in a terminal and you will see something like [ 3.989812] sd 4:0:0:0: [sde] 468862128 512-byte logical blocks: (240 GB/224 GiB) which shows that you are seeing the GiB of the drive and not the GB. The 3TB drive shows up like [ 3.462108] sd 10:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.73 TiB)– Terrance
9 hours ago
add a comment |
lsblk shows all disk partitions, while df -lh only shows your mounted partitions.
1
Don't do that .. sda2 seems to be a part of a raid1 (mirror) ...
– Soren A
9 hours ago
You are right. I removed the example.
– user3140225
9 hours ago
add a comment |
lsblk shows all disk partitions, while df -lh only shows your mounted partitions.
1
Don't do that .. sda2 seems to be a part of a raid1 (mirror) ...
– Soren A
9 hours ago
You are right. I removed the example.
– user3140225
9 hours ago
add a comment |
lsblk shows all disk partitions, while df -lh only shows your mounted partitions.
lsblk shows all disk partitions, while df -lh only shows your mounted partitions.
edited 9 hours ago
answered 10 hours ago
user3140225user3140225
6863 silver badges17 bronze badges
6863 silver badges17 bronze badges
1
Don't do that .. sda2 seems to be a part of a raid1 (mirror) ...
– Soren A
9 hours ago
You are right. I removed the example.
– user3140225
9 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Don't do that .. sda2 seems to be a part of a raid1 (mirror) ...
– Soren A
9 hours ago
You are right. I removed the example.
– user3140225
9 hours ago
1
1
Don't do that .. sda2 seems to be a part of a raid1 (mirror) ...
– Soren A
9 hours ago
Don't do that .. sda2 seems to be a part of a raid1 (mirror) ...
– Soren A
9 hours ago
You are right. I removed the example.
– user3140225
9 hours ago
You are right. I removed the example.
– user3140225
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Lex Thoonen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1163809%2fubuntu-show-wrong-disk-sizes-how-to-solve-it%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
What is wrong ?
– Soren A
10 hours ago
Thanks Soren, you've pointed something out I hadn't even noticed. So the 3TB disk(s) are there in lsblk but the total capacity I'm allowed to use like this is far less than 3TB.
– Lex Thoonen
10 hours ago
2
One problem I see here. You did a RAID 1 (mirrored) on a 3TB drive and a 240GB drive. The problem is that the Mirrored RAID will only be at the size of the SMALLEST drive so you will only get 240GB out of 3TB. Destroy your RAID and do them as separate drives but you will lose data so backup first.
– Terrance
9 hours ago