Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Not sure if VirtualBox or Ubuntu's fault.

I only asked for 128 GB space in VirtualBox, but Ubuntu is reading it as 134.7 GB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SirYodaJedi said:

I only asked for 128 GB space in VirtualBox, but Ubuntu is reading it as 134.7 GB.

Os size and reserved space. Nothing wrong

CPU:R9 3900x@4.5Ghz RAM:Vengeance Pro LPX @ 3200mhz MOBO:MSI Tomohawk B350 GPU:PNY GTX 1080 XLR8

DRIVES:500GB Samsung 970 Pro + Patriot Blast 480GB x2 + 12tb RAID10 NAS

MONITORS:Pixio PX329 32inch 1440p 165hz, LG 34UM68-p 1080p 75hz

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SirYodaJedi said:

I only asked for 128 GB space in VirtualBox, but Ubuntu is reading it as 134.7 GB.

Lol great question, if you try to use "lsblk" or "df" how many space does they give to you?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, JohnDongus said:

Os size and reserved space. Nothing wrong

I would understand if Ubuntu reported less than the 128 GB I assigned to the .vdi in VirtualBox, but not more.

19 hours ago, Lukyp said:

Lol great question, if you try to use "lsblk" or "df" how many space does they give to you?  

Not too familiar with Linux. I put those commands in Terminal, but I don't know what to look for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

*sigh* It's just Windows being Windows again.

 

In Windows, what it displays as "GB" (Gigabytes) is actually GiB (Gibibytes).

1 Gibibyte is 1024 Mebibytes, 1 Mebibyte is 1024 Kibibytes, etc.

Meanwhile,

1 Gigabyte is 1000 Megabytes, 1 Megabyte is 1000 Kilobytes, and so on.

What Ubuntu displays is actually Gigabytes, in this case, 128 Gibibytes (Windows) is 137.4 Gigabytes (Ubuntu).

 

So, no, there's nothing broken here; it's just different operating systems using different units to display disk size. With Windows using the wrong SI suffix ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

As for why your Ubuntu installation is smaller than 137.4 GB, it's because the EXT4 filesystem needs to use some space for journaling (i.e. recovery in case of power failure), and in this case it's using 2.7 GB for journaling, which won't be available to the user to use, so it's not counted as usable space. It might also be partially taken up by the boot partition.

Desktop: HP Z220 Workstation, 12 GB RAM, 2x500 GB HDD RAID0, + GTX 1060 3GB

Laptop: ThinkPad T430, 8 GB RAM, 1x120 GB SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TakataruMC said:

*sigh* It's just Windows being Windows again.

 

In Windows, what it displays as "GB" (Gigabytes) is actually GiB (Gibibytes).

1 Gibibyte is 1024 Mebibytes, 1 Mebibyte is 1024 Kibibytes, etc.

Meanwhile,

1 Gigabyte is 1000 Megabytes, 1 Megabyte is 1000 Kilobytes, and so on.

What Ubuntu displays is actually Gigabytes, in this case, 128 Gibibytes (Windows) is 137.4 Gigabytes (Ubuntu).

 

So, no, there's nothing broken here; it's just different operating systems using different units to display disk size. With Windows using the wrong SI suffix ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

As for why your Ubuntu installation is smaller than 137.4 GB, it's because the EXT4 filesystem needs to use some space for journaling (i.e. recovery in case of power failure), and in this case it's using 2.7 GB for journaling, which won't be available to the user to use, so it's not counted as usable space. It might also be partially taken up by the boot partition.

Oh crap, I didn't noticed! 
LMAO 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, TakataruMC said:

In Windows, what it displays as "GB" (Gigabytes) is actually GiB (Gibibytes).

1 Gibibyte is 1024 Mebibytes, 1 Mebibyte is 1024 Kibibytes, etc.

Meanwhile,

1 Gigabyte is 1000 Megabytes, 1 Megabyte is 1000 Kilobytes, and so on.

What Ubuntu displays is actually Gigabytes, in this case, 128 Gibibytes (Windows) is 137.4 Gigabytes (Ubuntu).

Bleh, more of that gibi-giga nonsense.

How do I make it use the base two definition instead? I don't have any reason to list it using the base ten definition if computers use binary anyway. (Not to mention, powers of 2 are easier for me to remember anyway)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SirYodaJedi said:

Bleh, more of that gibi-giga nonsense.

How do I make it use the base two definition instead? I don't have any reason to list it using the base ten definition if computers use binary anyway. (Not to mention, powers of 2 are easier for me to remember anyway)

You can't. Unless you're willing to completely modify Nautilus/GNOME Files and recompile it, along with every other application that lists file sizes...
I think KDE (Dolphin file manager) has an option to switch to base-2, so if you really wanted to you could replace GNOME with KDE and switch to it

Desktop: HP Z220 Workstation, 12 GB RAM, 2x500 GB HDD RAID0, + GTX 1060 3GB

Laptop: ThinkPad T430, 8 GB RAM, 1x120 GB SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×