Running Out of Disk Space in Production
116 points
4 days ago
| 14 comments
| alt-romes.github.io
| HN
flanfly
6 hours ago
[-]
A neat trick I was told is to always have ballast files on your systems. Just a few GiB of zeros that you can delete in cases like this. This won't fix the problem, but will buy you time and free space for stuff like lock files so you can get a working system.
reply
layer8
4 hours ago
[-]
Better fill those files with random bytes, to ensure the filesystem doesn’t apply some “I don’t actually have to store all-zero blocks” sparse-file optimization. To my knowledge no non-compressing file system currently does this, but who knows about the future.
reply
freedomben
3 hours ago
[-]
Yep, btrfs will happily do this to you. I verified it the hard way
reply
kccqzy
3 hours ago
[-]
Well btrfs supports compression so that’s understandable. However I personally prefer to control compression manually so it only compresses files marked by me for compression using chattr(1).
reply
ape4
4 hours ago
[-]
If I recall correctly:

    dd if=/dev/urandom of=/home/myrandomfile bs=1 count=N
reply
Twirrim
42 minutes ago
[-]
If you want to do it really quickly

    openssl enc -aes-256-ctr -pbkdf2 -pass pass:"$(date '+%s')" < /dev/zero | dd of=/home/myrandomfile bs=1M count=1024
Almost all CPUs have AES native instructions so you'll be able to produce pseudorandom junk really fast. Even my old system will produce it at about 3Gb/s. Much faster than urandom can go.
reply
fragmede
1 hour ago
[-]
bs=1 is a recipe for waiting far longer than you have to because of the overhead of the system calls. Better bs=N count=1
reply
__david__
1 hour ago
[-]
That’s also not great if you’re trying to make a 10 gigabyte file. In that case, use bs=1M and count=SizeInMB.
reply
marcosdumay
41 minutes ago
[-]
Modern computers are crazily overengineered...

Most current desktops (smaller than your usual server) won't have any problem with the GP's command. Yours is still better, of course.

reply
ape4
1 hour ago
[-]
Even if the block size (bs) is really big? Say, 10GB

(Not saying you're wrong, just asking)

reply
dspillett
4 hours ago
[-]
Similarly, I always leave some space unallocated on LMV volume groups. It means that I can temporarily expand a volume easily if needed.

It also serves to leave some space unused to help out the wear-levelling on the SSDs on which the RAID array that is the PV¹ for LVM. I'm, not 100% sure this is needed any more² but I've not looked into that sufficiently so until I do I'll keep the habit.

--------

[1] if there are multiple PVs, from different drives/arrays, in the VG, then you might need to manually skip a bit on each one because LVM will naturally fill one before using the next. Just allocate a small LV specially on each and don't use it. You can remove one/all of them and add the extents to the fill LV if/when needed. Giving it a useful name also reminds you why that bit of space is carved out.

[2] drives under-allocate by default IIRC

reply
justsomehnguy
1 hour ago
[-]
Not needed. All your unused/unfilled space is that space for wear-leveling. It wasn't needed even back then besides some corner cases. And most importantly 10% of the drive in ~2010 were 6-12GB, nowadays it's 50-100GB at least.
reply
dijit
4 hours ago
[-]
I always called it a “bit-mass”. Like a thermal mass used in freezers in places where the power is not very stable.

I knew I didn’t invent the concept, as there’s so many systems that cannot recover if the disk is totally full. (a write may be required in many systems in order to execute an instruction to remove things gracefully).

The latest thing I found with this issue is Unreal Engines Horde build system, its so tightly coupled with caches, object files and database references: that a manual clean up is extremely difficult and likely to create an unstable system. But you can configure it to have fewer build artefacts kept around and then it will clear itself out gracefully. - but it needs to be able to write to the disk to do it.

Now that I think about it, I don’t do this for inodes, but you can run out of those too and end up in a weird “out of disk” situation despite having lots of usable capacity left.

reply
throw0101d
4 hours ago
[-]
> A neat trick I was told is to always have ballast files on your systems.

ZFS has a "reservation" mechanism that's handy:

> The minimum amount of space guaranteed to a dataset, not including its descendants. When the amount of space used is below this value, the dataset is treated as if it were taking up the amount of space specified by refreservation. The refreservation reservation is accounted for in the parent datasets' space used, and counts against the parent datasets' quotas and reservations.

* https://openzfs.github.io/openzfs-docs/man/master/7/zfsprops...

Quotas prevent users/groups/directories (ZFS datasets) from using too much space, but reservations ensure that particular areas always have a minimum amount set aside for them.

reply
throw0101d
2 hours ago
[-]
Typo; link should be:

* https://openzfs.github.io/openzfs-docs/man/master/7/zfsprops...

Addendum: there's also the built-in compression functionality:

> When set to on (the default), indicates that the current default compression algorithm should be used. The default balances compression and decompression speed, with compression ratio and is expected to work well on a wide variety of workloads. Unlike all other settings for this property, on does not select a fixed compression type. As new compression algorithms are added to ZFS and enabled on a pool, the default compression algorithm may change. The current default compression algorithm is either lzjb or, if the lz4_compress feature is enabled, lz4.

* https://openzfs.github.io/openzfs-docs/man/master/7/zfsprops...

reply
dizhn
3 hours ago
[-]
Also if you VMs on a disk backed by ZFS it's trivial to extend those disks provided you actually do have space on the real disk. (Even automatic with LXC).
reply
happycrappy
2 hours ago
[-]
Interesting strategy, can't believe I've never heard of this one before.

Would it be more pragmatic to allocate a swap file instead? Something that provides a theoretical benefit in the short term vs a static reservation.

reply
prmoustache
45 minutes ago
[-]
Because adding swap file is instantaneous, removing one that is in use can take a longtime unless you reboot the OS so you can't just nuke it quickly.
reply
fifilura
5 hours ago
[-]
I did this too, but i also zipped the file, turns out it had great packing ratio!
reply
saagarjha
5 hours ago
[-]
Personally I just keep the file on a ramdisk so you can avoid having to fetch it from slow storage
reply
3form
4 hours ago
[-]
Neat! I optimized for my own case, and I'm storing my ramdisk on SSD to gain persistence.
reply
HoldOnAMinute
2 hours ago
[-]
Sounds like something straight out of Dilbert
reply
ninalanyon
5 hours ago
[-]
This is why I never empty the Rubbish Bin/trash Can on my Linux laptop until the disk fills.
reply
Chaosvex
4 hours ago
[-]
Similar to the old game development trick of hiding some memory away and then freeing it up near the end of development when the budget starts getting tight.
reply
dj0k3r
3 hours ago
[-]
I did this recently, aka, docker images prune. Can confirm, saved the day.
reply
omarqureshi
5 hours ago
[-]
Surely a 50% warning alarm on disk usage covers this without manual intervention?
reply
theshrike79
5 hours ago
[-]
Depends. A Kubernetes container might have only a few megabytes of disk space, because it shouldn't need it.

Except that one time when .NET decides that the incoming POST is over some magic limit and it doesn't do the processing in-memory like before, but instead has to write it to disk, crashing the whole pod. Fun times.

Also my Unraid NAS has two drives in "WARNING! 98% USED" alert state. One has 200GB of free space, the other 330GB. Percentages in integers don't work when the starting number is too big :)

reply
evil-olive
1 hour ago
[-]
> Surely a 50% warning alarm on disk usage covers this without manual intervention?

surely you don't need a fire extinguisher in your kitchen, if you have a smoke detector?

a "warning alarm" is a terrible concept, in general. it's a perfect way to lead to alert fatigue.

over time, you're likely to have someone silence the alarm because there's some host sitting at 57% disk usage for totally normal reasons and they're tired of getting spammed about it.

even well-tuned alert rules (ones that predict growth over time rather than only looking at the current value) tend to be targeted towards catching relatively "slow" leaks of disk usage.

there is always the possibility for a "fast" disk space consumer to fill up the disk more quickly than your alerting system can bring it to your attention and you can fix it. at the extreme end, for example, a standard EBS volume has a throughput of 125mb/sec. something that saturates that limit will fill up 10gb of free space in 80 seconds.

reply
jcims
5 hours ago
[-]
If the alarms are reliably configured, confirmed to be working, low noise enough to be actioned, etc etc.

And of course there's nothing to say that both of these things can't be done simultaneously.

reply
coredog64
3 hours ago
[-]
You don't want an alarm on a usage threshold, you want a linear regression that predicts when utilization will cross a threshold. Then you set your alarms for "How long does it take me to remediate this condition?"
reply
dspillett
5 hours ago
[-]
If the alarm works. And it actioned not just snoozed too much or just dismissed entirely.

Defence in depth is a good idea: proper alarms, and a secondary measure in case they don't have the intended effect.

reply
pixl97
5 hours ago
[-]
Alarms are great, but when something goes wrong SSDs can fill up amazingly fast!
reply
n4r9
4 hours ago
[-]
Surely there are pitfalls either way. A ballast file can be deleted too readily, or someone could forget to re-add it.
reply
jaapz
5 hours ago
[-]
Love the simplicity and pragmatism of this solution
reply
bombcar
4 hours ago
[-]
Some filesystems can be unable to delete a file if full. Something to be a bit worried about.
reply
6031769
3 hours ago
[-]
Please name and shame those filesystems so that we will all be forewarned.
reply
SAI_Peregrinus
1 hour ago
[-]
Any Copy-on-Write filesystem can run into this. There's always some way around it, but it can be problematic if you only have one device, can't remember the steps to fix a full filesystem, and can't look up the steps because you can't launch a browser without it trying to make some files!
reply
testplzignore
5 hours ago
[-]
Would another way be to drop the reserved space (typically 1% to 5% on an ext file system)?
reply
bombcar
4 hours ago
[-]
Reserved space doesn't protect you against root, who is often the user to blame for the last used MB.
reply
dirkt
3 hours ago
[-]
If you run nginx anyway, why not serve static files from nginx? No need for temporary files, no extra disk space.

The authorization can probably be done somehow in nginx as well.

reply
aftbit
3 hours ago
[-]
Yeah it's a bit odd to use a Haskell server to serve a static file which nginx then needs to buffer. You'd do much much better just serving the file out of nginx. You could authenticate requests using the very simple auth_request module:

https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_auth_request_module....

reply
kccqzy
3 hours ago
[-]
Even if your authorization is so sophisticated that nginx cannot do it, a common pattern I’ve seen is to support a special HTTP response header for the reverse proxy to read directly from disk after your custom authorization code completes. This trick dates back to at least 2010. The nginx version of this seemed to be called X-Accel-Redirect from a quick search.
reply
entropie
5 hours ago
[-]
> I rushed to run du -sh on everything I could, as that’s as good as I could manage.

I recently came across gdu (1) and have installed/used it on every machine since then.

[1]: https://github.com/dundee/gdu

reply
dizhn
3 hours ago
[-]
gdu is really nice but ncdu, though slower, is very useful and is usually available on distro repos.
reply
NitpickLawyer
3 hours ago
[-]
I use dust for this, but gdu looks nice, I'll give it a try. Thanks for sharing.
reply
Neil44
4 hours ago
[-]
I also discovered gdu recently. It's really good. It saves me running du -h --max-depth=1 | sort -h a million times trying to find where the space has gone while you're stressing about production being down.
reply
illusive4080
3 hours ago
[-]
Have you used ncdu? I wonder how this compares.
reply
gmuslera
3 hours ago
[-]
Putting limits on folders where information may be added (with partitions or project quotas) is a proactive way to avoid that something misbehaves and fills the whole disk. Filling that partition or quota may still cause some problems, depending on the applications writing there, but the impact may be lower and easier to fix than running out of space for everything.
reply
SoftTalker
1 hour ago
[-]
I've run into that "process still has deleted files open" situation a few times. df shows disk full, but du can't account for all of it, that's your clue to run lsof and look for "deleted" files that are open.

Even more confusing can be cases where a file is opened, deleted or renamed without being closed, and then a different file is created under the orginal path. To quote the man page, "lsof reports only the path by which the file was opened, not its possibly different final path."

reply
ilaksh
1 hour ago
[-]
I'm not sure that his problems are really over if a LOT of people were downloading a 2GB file. It would depend on the plan. Especially if his server is in the US.

But maybe the European Hetzner servers still have really big limits even for small ones.

But still, if people keep downloading, that could add up.

reply
bdcravens
4 hours ago
[-]
I appreciate the last line

> Note: this was written fully by me, human.

reply
nottorp
1 hour ago
[-]
Didn't root used to have some reserved space (and a bunch of inodes) on file systems just for occasions like this?
reply
huijzer
4 hours ago
[-]
> Plausible Analytics, with a 8.5GB (clickhouse) database

And this is why I tried Plausible once and never looked back.

To get basic but effective analytics, use GoAccess and point it at the Caddy or Nginx logs. It’s written in C and thus barely uses memory. With a few hundreds visits per day, the logs are currently 10 MB per day. Caddy will automatically truncate if logs go above 100 MB.

reply
grugdev42
2 hours ago
[-]
You missed out point five.

5. Implement infrastructure monitoring.

Assuming you're on something like Ubuntu, the monit program is brilliant.

It's open source and self hosted, configured using plain text files, and can run scripts when thresholds are met.

I personally have it configured to hit a Slack webhook for a monitoring channel. Instant notifications for free!

reply
brunoborges
3 hours ago
[-]
I remember a story of an Oracle Database customer who had production broken for days until an Oracle support escalation led to identifying the problem as mere "No disk space left".
reply
AbraKdabra
3 hours ago
[-]
Or NTP, if something is not working df -h and date are the first commands I input.

It's always lupu... I mean NTP or disk space.

reply
jollymonATX
1 hour ago
[-]
Never partition 100%. Simple solution here really and should be standard for every sysadmin. Like never worked with one that needed to be told this...
reply
renatovico
1 hour ago
[-]
Why not implement x send file ?
reply
RALaBarge
2 hours ago
[-]
Wait until you run out of inodes!
reply