[Ocfs2-users] Different size with du and ls

[Markus Meyer]

Hi all,

I stumbled over a curious thing. The Linux tools "df" and "du" aren't 
working correctly on an OCFS2 filesystem. "df" shows approx. twice the 
size as there is on the volume.
Here how I found out about this issue:

- same dir(a few files more in OCFS but the files are ca. 12 kB in 
size), first on XFS  second on the OCFS volume

# du -ms /mnt/user/small/kl/
439	/mnt/user/small/kl/
# du -ms ~wkw/data/user/small/kl/
27	/web/wkw/data/user/small/kl/

- file size on OCFS2
# du -ks /mnt/user/small/11/11zzzzwa1.jpg
64	11zzzzwa1.jpg
# ls -lh /mnt/user/small/11/11zzzzwa1.jpg
  2,4K  11zzzzwa1.jpg
- same file on XFS
# ls -lh /data/user/small/11/11zzzzwa1.jpg
  2,4K  /data/user/small/11/11zzzzwa1.jpg

# md5sum ~wkw/data/user/small/11/11zzzzwa1.jpg
d49c626360a37de9134ddc0ed31b1f59  /web/wkw/data/user/small/11/11zzzzwa1.jpg
# md5sum /mnt/user/small/11/11zzzzwa1.jpg
d49c626360a37de9134ddc0ed31b1f59  11zzzzwa1.jpg

Following versions we use:
Kernel: Vanilla Debian Kernel 2.6.25-2-amd64
# modinfo ocfs2
description:    OCFS2 1.5.0
version:        1.5.0
vermagic:       2.6.25-2-amd64 SMP mod_unload
# dpkg -s ocfs2-tools | grep ^Vers
Version: 1.2.4-1.2

The OCFS2 has been created with "-T mail -N 2".

Can anyone explain why there is this big difference between "du" and 
"ls"? Currently we can't rely on "df/du" to give us correct information 
about the disk usage. Maybe this problem is with the "df" version so I 
post the version number here too:
# dpkg -s coreutils | grep ^Vers
Version: 5.97-5.3



Regards,

	Markus Meyer