Rather than grabbing in_use from df, calculate for precision #1785
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Looks good to me. Thanks! |
remh
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 27, 2015
Rather than grabbing in_use from df, calculate for precision
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently, for our manual checks, we are just grabbing the percentage for disk in_use from the output of df. This produces a percentage with no decimal precision. To improve this precision, let's calculate the disk in_use metric ourselves based on the free and used values supplied by df. This calculation is consistent with how df calculates disk usage, but isn't rounded up.
Calculation: <disk_used> / (<disk_used> + <disk_free>)
Further Proof:
We don't calculate in_use as (<disk_used> / <disk_total>), because <disk_total> includes reserved space that is inaccessable by the user. Calculating this way would produce a misleading value that is of a lower percentage than what df shows.