DSM 7.1 Inconsistency between shared folders size and storage analyzer reported disk occupancy

Currently reading
DSM 7.1 Inconsistency between shared folders size and storage analyzer reported disk occupancy

8
1
NAS
DS220+,DS120j
Operating system
  1. macOS
  2. Windows
Mobile operating system
  1. Android
  2. iOS
Last edited:
EDITED : I am a home user (so my knowledge of synology system is shallow) but I am puzzled because the total size of files reported by storage analyzer is 3Tbytes, althoug if I add the size of shared folders in daily reports I get 1.7 Tbytes.

I understand that the operating system, the apps, and in general all the stuff the system needs to run are also stored on disk, but... 1.3 Tbytes?.

BTW, I have deleted recycle bin and scrubbed the drive before posting this.



EDITION: there is a folder called usbshare1 (1.7 Tbytes) that I suppose is the hyperbackup file which should be stored on an external disk. If this is not the case, this should be the reason
 
...the size of files reported by storage analyzer is 3Tbytes, althoug size of shared folders in daily reports adds up to 2.7 Tbytes only. Somehow 1.3 Tbytes of disk are missing.
? I think your maths / typing is a bit off there...is the difference actually 0.3TB or 1.3TB?
 
Upvote 0
Last edited:
Thanks, FTN, You are absolutely right, my mistake, it's 1.7 Tbytes, (23.9 + 206.6 + 212.5 + 214.3 + 939.4 + 39 = 1,635.7). But... there is a folder named usbshare1, 1.7 Tbytes in size that I assume is the hyperbackup stored on an usb disk
-- post merged: --

Using versioning on an ext4 formatted system? Snapshots?
Thanks Telos, I store a relatively stable set of files (copy of my music, photos and videos library), that may grow les than 10 Gbytes per month and Mac Time Machine backups which is now 206.6 Gbytes.

My doubt now is that I have not included in the total amount of 1.7 Tbytes (not 2.7 TBytes as stated in my post) a folder called usbshare1 of 1.7 Tbytes. For me this folder has to be the hyperbackup files stored on an usb external disk, of course, if this is not the case, then this may be the explanation
Using versioning on an ext4 formatted system? Snapshots?
 
Upvote 0
usbshare is indeed an external USB drive; as @Telos said, the extra space consumed could well be snapshots if its btrfs formatted...
 
Upvote 0
Using versioning on an ext4 formatted system? Snapshots?

You are probably right! If this is the case, I will open a new thread with my questions derived from that, thanks, Fortran! (I was a Fortran programmer, I loved it, and this gathered my demise to project manager.... :)
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2023-01-28 at 05.04.43.png
    Screenshot 2023-01-28 at 05.04.43.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 25
Upvote 0

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

No. They are different. In that thread, it is about exploring the possibility and possible cons of...
Replies
2
Views
1,394
I think: Any unused RAM space can be allocated to read write cache. My own system has similar to yours. I...
Replies
3
Views
3,119
I use Syncovery (it's also available as a Synology package). For simple stuff there is FreeFileSync.
Replies
7
Views
2,276
So I found the solution I'll post it for future reference, the problem was with the files on the NAS...
Replies
2
Views
2,189
Hi, Correct. This is were many of Synology users have ran into a limitation of Drive (formaly known as...
Replies
1
Views
1,852
  • Question
Thanks for your reply. I finally figured it out. I had checked the box where it said to hide the shared...
Replies
2
Views
884
Forgot: An Addendum to last post….. During the time that error emails were being sent (4-6 a day)… When...
Replies
1
Views
1,390

Welcome to SynoForum.com!

SynoForum.com is an unofficial Synology forum for NAS owners and enthusiasts.

Registration is free, easy and fast!

Back
Top