23 replies to this topic

[hcau1]

Indeed, 1000 and 1024. But is this not just OpenWebIF but also the OpenPLI own menu system. This could explain the small difference (I think) between both of them.

 

The problem being raised in this post is a different one. It is that over a period of time, most of the free capacity of the storage medium disappears.

As others have noted in this thread a reboot and as I noted here also a system file check, restores the proper "free" capacity value.

So maybe this sounds more like an deeper issue...

 

Its possible that the difference reported of capacity used between the OpenWebIF and OpenPLI UI menu's is caused by the 1000 vs 1024 difference.

But apart from these (small) differences, both report a comparable steady and gradual loss of free capacity. Would 1000 versus 1024 account for that?

 

The question might be how is the (available and used) capacity data reported to OpenWebIF and the OpenPLI UI menu's,  by ? (kernel?)

[littlesat]

For harddisks it should be '1000' not '1024' and this feels strange....  OpenWebIf shows a 'bit' less they are using 1024. OpenPLi uses in the about screen 1000... which follows showing a bit more capacity and free room left.... A number of bytes is reported which is calculated back to KB/MB/GB/TB in the code. Some times with 1000 as it should be and some times done with 1024, which feels better but is less pessimistic.... 

[WanWizard]

The common misunderstanding between Gigabyte ( GB, uses a factor 1000 ) and Gibibyte ( GiB, uses factor 1024 ).

 

Drive hardware vendors (spinning or SSD) in general use GB, memory vendors (but usually not USB stick vendors) in general use GiB.

 

Which is why OpenPLi in about uses GB, so it matches what you bought, i.e. a 500GiB disk will show 500 GB (which technically is incorrect, but most people don't know what GiB means), and not 476GB (what the OS will report).

[littlesat]

And it seems OpenWebif shows GiB....