Wrong Image size in web interface



  • Running Version 1.3.5
    SVN Revision: 6067
    Client 0.11.11
    Debian stable

    Hello, i’ve got a problem when i look into image management on the web interface.
    I cant understand the difference between the informations on the web interface and the image size on the server.

    Here is what i can see on the interface :

    IUT-206 - 32
    default: Windows 7
    Single Disk - Resizable
    Everything 4.03 MiB Partclone Compressed 2016-07-05 08:51:33

    IUT-206-Prof - 36
    default: Windows 7
    Single Disk - Resizable
    Everything 4.04 MiB Partclone Compressed 2016-07-04 17:09:35

    IUT-221-Prof - 37
    default: Windows 7
    Single Disk - Resizable
    Everything 6.25 MiB Partclone Compressed 2016-07-04 15:19:22

    And on the server itself :

    ls -alh IUT206
    total 7,0G
    drwxrwxrwx  2 fog root 4,0K juil.  5  2016 .
    drwxrwxrwx 33 fog root 4,0K mai    2 14:40 ..
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root    2 juil.  5  2016 d1.fixed_size_partitions
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root 1,0M juil.  5  2016 d1.mbr
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root  190 juil.  5  2016 d1.minimum.partitions
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root   15 juil.  5  2016 d1.original.fstypes
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root    0 juil.  5  2016 d1.original.swapuuids
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root 8,2M juil.  5  2016 d1p1.img
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root 7,0G juil.  5  2016 d1p2.img
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root  190 juil.  5  2016 d1.partitions
    
    ls -alh IUT206Prof
    total 7,0G
    drwxrwxrwx  2 fog root 4,0K juil.  4  2016 .
    drwxrwxrwx 33 fog root 4,0K mai    2 14:40 ..
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root    2 juil.  4  2016 d1.fixed_size_partitions
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root 1,0M juil.  4  2016 d1.mbr
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root  190 juil.  4  2016 d1.minimum.partitions
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root   15 juil.  4  2016 d1.original.fstypes
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root    0 juil.  4  2016 d1.original.swapuuids
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root 8,2M juil.  4  2016 d1p1.img
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root 7,0G juil.  4  2016 d1p2.img
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root  190 juil.  4  2016 d1.partitions
    
    ls -alh IUT221Prof
    total 11G
    drwxrwxrwx  2 fog root 4,0K juil.  4  2016 .
    drwxrwxrwx 33 fog root 4,0K mai    2 14:40 ..
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root    2 juil.  4  2016 d1.fixed_size_partitions
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root 1,0M juil.  4  2016 d1.mbr
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root  190 juil.  4  2016 d1.minimum.partitions
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root   15 juil.  4  2016 d1.original.fstypes
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root    0 juil.  4  2016 d1.original.swapuuids
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root 8,4M juil.  4  2016 d1p1.img
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root  11G juil.  4  2016 d1p2.img
    -rwxrwxrwx  1 fog root  190 juil.  4  2016 d1.partitions
    

    What could be the problem ?
    Thanks for your help


  • Senior Developer

    Alright, well I already addressed the “file not found” type problem in the RC’s thanks to this. So at least there’s that.



  • @Tom-Elliott
    No, same “problem”


  • Senior Developer

    @plegrand After removing that image, and doing the same steps as needed, any luck?

    That might be causing a break in the output of data for the Image Size on Server stuff which I should be able to address (if it is doing what I think it is).



  • @Tom-Elliott said in Wrong Image size in web interface:

    systemctl -l status FOGImageSize

    systemctl -l status FOGImageSize

    ● FOGImageSize.service - FOGImageSize
       Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/FOGImageSize.service; enabled)
       Active: active (running) since ven. 2017-05-12 14:32:36 CEST; 5min ago
     Main PID: 12288 (FOGImageSize)
       CGroup: /system.slice/FOGImageSize.service
               ├─12288 /usr/bin/php -q /opt/fog/service/FOGImageSize/FOGImageSize &
               └─12289 /usr/bin/php -q /opt/fog/service/FOGImageSize/FOGImageSize &
    
    mai 12 14:32:36 Fog systemd[1]: Started FOGImageSize.
    mai 12 14:32:38 Fog FOGImageSize[12288]: du: impossible d'accéder à « /home/images/PORTGLT650G2 »: Aucun fichier ou dossier de ce type
    

    The last error is normal there is no directory PORTGLT650G2, i have to remove image in web interface


  • Senior Developer

    @plegrand Anything from:

    systemctl -l status FOGImageSize
    

    (Assuming this is a systemd based startup system)



  • @Tom-Elliott
    For the moment i prefer to keep the latest stable version.
    There is no errors into fogimagesize.log.


  • Senior Developer

    @plegrand If you’d like you can try installing the RC versions? Maybe something was messed up unknowingly?

    I’m not able to replicate. Would you also be able to post the fogimagesize.log file? Maybe something is erroring out that we just aren’t seeing? (This element only deals with Size on server for what its worth).



  • @Tom-Elliott
    i restarted FOGImage service which is present in 1.3.5 without success

    But as you said :
    “this element has no impact on the functionality/usability of the images in question.”

    No problem for me


  • Senior Developer

    Image Size on Server is the 'Space it physically takes up on the server.'
    Image Size on Client is taken during imaging (capture or deploy) as the image is being applied. It updates the partition working on and then all of the information is taken together to try to tell the admin’s what the “smallest” drive acceptable for the image to still work.

    So, ideally, the Size on client should be larger than the size on server.

    As stated before, neither of these fields is indicative of a problem with the image or its usability. It simply is there to help keep the admin’s informed.


  • Senior Developer

    @plegrand Try restarting the FOGImageSize service. (I Can’t remember if that got pushed out in 1.3.5 or 1.4.0 though)



  • Hello Tom,
    this the size on client, but the size on server

    FOG Configuration => Fog Settings => General Settings => FOG_FTP_IMAGE_SIZE (on)
    

    is wrong also

    Then, what is the meanings of these informations ?


  • Senior Developer

    What portion is this showing up at? The size on client or size on server? Once again, however, this element has no impact on the functionality/usability of the images in question.


  • Senior Developer

    I’m not aware of there being any problems. Even still, this is not a “make or break” feature.




Log in to reply
 

394
Online

39.3k
Users

11.0k
Topics

104.6k
Posts

Looks like your connection to FOG Project was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.