From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A62E1FF161 for ; Sat, 27 Sep 2025 18:10:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6F4781F701; Sat, 27 Sep 2025 18:10:25 +0200 (CEST) From: Marco Gaiarin Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2025 16:57:40 +0200 Organization: Il gaio usa sempre TIN per le liste, fallo anche tu!!! Message-ID: <28miql-d0b2.ln1@leia.lilliput.linux.it> References: <4e2222b8-f423-41e3-a6fb-522a6f792f0b@gilouweb.com> <4d28ql-5ua2.ln1@leia.lilliput.linux.it> X-Trace: eraldo.lilliput.linux.it 1758988178 1626522 192.168.1.45 (27 Sep 2025 15:49:38 GMT) To: Marco Gaiarin X-Mailer: tin/2.6.4-20240224 ("Banff") (Linux/6.14.0-32-generic (x86_64)) X-Gateway-System: SmartGate 1.4.5 In-Reply-To: <4d28ql-5ua2.ln1@leia.lilliput.linux.it>; from SmartGate on Sat, Sep 27, 2025 at 18:06:01PM +0200 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.244 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DATE_IN_PAST_24_48 1.34 Date: is 24 to 48 hours before Received: date DMARC_PASS -0.1 DMARC pass policy JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL 0.5 SPF set to ?all KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_PASS -0.001 SPF: HELO matches SPF record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [PVE-User] Analysis of free space... X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE user list Cc: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-user-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-user" > Uh, wait... effectively we forgot to enable 'discard' on volumes, and we have > enabled afterward (but rebooted the VM). Still here. I've rechecked every passage and i summarize here: 1) ZFS storage had 'Thin provision' enabled from the start 2) we create a bounch of volumes for the VM, and, using LVM, bind that on some logical volumes XFS formatted. 'discard' was not checked. 3) we delete roughly 20+TB of data from VM, we try to copy some more data on VM volumes but storage fill up. 4) we enabled 'discard' on volumes, reboot VM and phisical node, do some manual trim: some TB get freed, but not 20+TB. 5) we find another 8TB of junk data and delete them; after that, we do a manual trim that freed 8TB on storage. Evidently data copied (and deleted) on voluems before we set 'discard=on' are not managed by trim, and we need in some way to force some FS 'rescan'... How? Thanks. -- _______________________________________________ pve-user mailing list pve-user@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user