The directory I'm measuring (as a test) is as follows:
Code: Select all
root@server [~/imapdtool/testdir]# ls -l
total 92
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 11 15:04 ./
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Aug 10 21:22 ../
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 121 Aug 11 15:04 error_log
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 20176 Aug 10 21:22 file1
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 91 Aug 10 21:22 file2
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6939 Aug 10 21:22 file3
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4824 Aug 10 21:22 file4
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10434 Aug 10 21:22 file5
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6742 Aug 10 21:22 file6
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 471 Aug 10 21:22 file7*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 91 Aug 10 21:22 file8*
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 9885 Aug 10 21:22 file9*So, I read up a bit more on du. Apparently, it measures in blocks, not actual file sizes. Is this correct? If so, I would assume (against my better judgement) that this discrepancy would increase leaps and bounds as the directories get larger. Would there be any way to get du to report the filesize instead?
Thanks in advance,
Jeremy