How to Pin Point Large File eating space in Fedora 18





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







6















I can't determine exactly what file is eating up my disk.



Firstly I used df command to list my directories:



devtmpfs                 16438304        0  16438304   0% /dev
tmpfs 16449868 0 16449868 0% /dev/shm
tmpfs 16449868 1637676 14812192 10% /run
tmpfs 16449868 0 16449868 0% /sys/fs/cgroup
/dev/mapper/fedora-root 51475068 38443612 10393632 79% /
tmpfs 16449868 384 16449484 1% /tmp
/dev/sda3 487652 66874 391082 15% /boot
/dev/mapper/fedora-home 889839636 44677452 799937840 6% /home


Then I ran du -h / | grep '[0-9,]+G'.



The problem is I get everything including other directories,
so I need to get specifically find /dev/mapper/fedora-root
but when I try du -h /dev/mapper/fedora-root | grep '[0-9,]+G' I get no results.



I need to know what's eating up 79% of directory /



How can I solve this?










share|improve this question






















  • 5





    If you want a graphical tool, you can install ncdu.

    – Panki
    May 24 at 8:23






  • 1





    @Panki in these situations I find the dirstat gui's much more effective. qdirstat/kdirstat are my go-to's for seeing big files/folders.

    – LambdaBeta
    May 24 at 21:07











  • du -h --max-depth=1 / | awk '$1 ~ /G/' | sort, find the next interesting largest dir and then drill down with the same command (replacing / with your new target).

    – GracefulRestart
    May 24 at 22:56


















6















I can't determine exactly what file is eating up my disk.



Firstly I used df command to list my directories:



devtmpfs                 16438304        0  16438304   0% /dev
tmpfs 16449868 0 16449868 0% /dev/shm
tmpfs 16449868 1637676 14812192 10% /run
tmpfs 16449868 0 16449868 0% /sys/fs/cgroup
/dev/mapper/fedora-root 51475068 38443612 10393632 79% /
tmpfs 16449868 384 16449484 1% /tmp
/dev/sda3 487652 66874 391082 15% /boot
/dev/mapper/fedora-home 889839636 44677452 799937840 6% /home


Then I ran du -h / | grep '[0-9,]+G'.



The problem is I get everything including other directories,
so I need to get specifically find /dev/mapper/fedora-root
but when I try du -h /dev/mapper/fedora-root | grep '[0-9,]+G' I get no results.



I need to know what's eating up 79% of directory /



How can I solve this?










share|improve this question






















  • 5





    If you want a graphical tool, you can install ncdu.

    – Panki
    May 24 at 8:23






  • 1





    @Panki in these situations I find the dirstat gui's much more effective. qdirstat/kdirstat are my go-to's for seeing big files/folders.

    – LambdaBeta
    May 24 at 21:07











  • du -h --max-depth=1 / | awk '$1 ~ /G/' | sort, find the next interesting largest dir and then drill down with the same command (replacing / with your new target).

    – GracefulRestart
    May 24 at 22:56














6












6








6


3






I can't determine exactly what file is eating up my disk.



Firstly I used df command to list my directories:



devtmpfs                 16438304        0  16438304   0% /dev
tmpfs 16449868 0 16449868 0% /dev/shm
tmpfs 16449868 1637676 14812192 10% /run
tmpfs 16449868 0 16449868 0% /sys/fs/cgroup
/dev/mapper/fedora-root 51475068 38443612 10393632 79% /
tmpfs 16449868 384 16449484 1% /tmp
/dev/sda3 487652 66874 391082 15% /boot
/dev/mapper/fedora-home 889839636 44677452 799937840 6% /home


Then I ran du -h / | grep '[0-9,]+G'.



The problem is I get everything including other directories,
so I need to get specifically find /dev/mapper/fedora-root
but when I try du -h /dev/mapper/fedora-root | grep '[0-9,]+G' I get no results.



I need to know what's eating up 79% of directory /



How can I solve this?










share|improve this question
















I can't determine exactly what file is eating up my disk.



Firstly I used df command to list my directories:



devtmpfs                 16438304        0  16438304   0% /dev
tmpfs 16449868 0 16449868 0% /dev/shm
tmpfs 16449868 1637676 14812192 10% /run
tmpfs 16449868 0 16449868 0% /sys/fs/cgroup
/dev/mapper/fedora-root 51475068 38443612 10393632 79% /
tmpfs 16449868 384 16449484 1% /tmp
/dev/sda3 487652 66874 391082 15% /boot
/dev/mapper/fedora-home 889839636 44677452 799937840 6% /home


Then I ran du -h / | grep '[0-9,]+G'.



The problem is I get everything including other directories,
so I need to get specifically find /dev/mapper/fedora-root
but when I try du -h /dev/mapper/fedora-root | grep '[0-9,]+G' I get no results.



I need to know what's eating up 79% of directory /



How can I solve this?







linux disk-usage






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited May 26 at 13:15









Jeff Schaller

48.7k11 gold badges72 silver badges162 bronze badges




48.7k11 gold badges72 silver badges162 bronze badges










asked May 24 at 8:16









hypermanhyperman

393 bronze badges




393 bronze badges











  • 5





    If you want a graphical tool, you can install ncdu.

    – Panki
    May 24 at 8:23






  • 1





    @Panki in these situations I find the dirstat gui's much more effective. qdirstat/kdirstat are my go-to's for seeing big files/folders.

    – LambdaBeta
    May 24 at 21:07











  • du -h --max-depth=1 / | awk '$1 ~ /G/' | sort, find the next interesting largest dir and then drill down with the same command (replacing / with your new target).

    – GracefulRestart
    May 24 at 22:56














  • 5





    If you want a graphical tool, you can install ncdu.

    – Panki
    May 24 at 8:23






  • 1





    @Panki in these situations I find the dirstat gui's much more effective. qdirstat/kdirstat are my go-to's for seeing big files/folders.

    – LambdaBeta
    May 24 at 21:07











  • du -h --max-depth=1 / | awk '$1 ~ /G/' | sort, find the next interesting largest dir and then drill down with the same command (replacing / with your new target).

    – GracefulRestart
    May 24 at 22:56








5




5





If you want a graphical tool, you can install ncdu.

– Panki
May 24 at 8:23





If you want a graphical tool, you can install ncdu.

– Panki
May 24 at 8:23




1




1





@Panki in these situations I find the dirstat gui's much more effective. qdirstat/kdirstat are my go-to's for seeing big files/folders.

– LambdaBeta
May 24 at 21:07





@Panki in these situations I find the dirstat gui's much more effective. qdirstat/kdirstat are my go-to's for seeing big files/folders.

– LambdaBeta
May 24 at 21:07













du -h --max-depth=1 / | awk '$1 ~ /G/' | sort, find the next interesting largest dir and then drill down with the same command (replacing / with your new target).

– GracefulRestart
May 24 at 22:56





du -h --max-depth=1 / | awk '$1 ~ /G/' | sort, find the next interesting largest dir and then drill down with the same command (replacing / with your new target).

– GracefulRestart
May 24 at 22:56










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















10














My magic command in such situation is :



du -m . --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20


To use this :





  1. cd into the top-level directory containing the files eating space. This can be / if you have no clue ;-)

  2. run du -m . --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20. This will list the 20 biggest subdirectories of the current directory, sorted by decreasing size.


  3. cd into the biggest directory and repeat the du ... command until you find the BIG file(s)






share|improve this answer





















  • 6





    I would consider adding -x to du for this question's scenario. This prevents it from crossing filesystem boundaries and so doesn't include the other filesystems on the machine like /home, or any nfs mounts/mounted ISO files etc, all of which presumably OP would want to exclude since they are trying to find something taking up space on a particular filesystem.

    – Kefka
    May 24 at 16:42








  • 6





    That's an interesting choice of options. Personally, I rather du -sh */ | sort -nh. du -m would round up everything to at least a megabyte. du -h will display sizes with suffixes like K, M, and G. sort -h will take these suffixes into account. Chosing du -s */ instead of du --max-depth=1 . allows one to refine the glob. Using head discards results that might have taken work add up, so I think it's better to let everything be printed in case the sizes are evenly distributed. Avoiding sort -r puts the bigger results closer to the new command line prompt.

    – JoL
    May 24 at 18:53













  • du -sch * | sort -h | less is a handy equivalent for --max-depth=1

    – Peter Cordes
    May 25 at 17:16











  • thanks for this i manage to isolate all directories until i have pinpointed the right location.

    – hyperman
    May 29 at 4:43



















10














ncdu is a great tool for this kind of problem. Here's the corresponding package.



enter image description hereenter image description here



You can use -x if you want to stay on only one filesystem, without following symlinks. For example, as root:



ncdu -x /home


It's the command line equivalent of DaisyDisk, Baobab or WinDirStat.



It might take a long time to scan a large folders, but once it's done it should be very fast to find the largest files.






share|improve this answer























  • 1





    thank you i used this on my development server it was easy using it, but sadly i cant install it on our production.

    – hyperman
    May 29 at 4:44





















8














If you have a feel for the actual size of the file you can find files larger than a specific size.



Eg, to find files larger than 10 MiB:



find /mounted/drive -size +10M


Or



find /mounted/drive -size +10M -exec ls -lh {} +




Httqm's suggestion is also good if the problem isn't one big file but a large collection of smaller files. That is use du to show directory totals. Limiting with --max-depth is very useful with large directory trees:



du -m some/directory --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20
du some/directory --max-depth=1 | sort -n | tail -21


Will break a single directory down into sub-directories, the second of these gives you the total for the directory you're listing as well.






share|improve this answer




























  • Instead of -exec ls .. you can also use -ls for some more info.

    – eckes
    May 25 at 11:19



















5














Use this command to find out which directories are the largest:



du -a / | sort -n -r | head 





share|improve this answer


























  • I often use du -h | sort -h | less. Or leave out the less, because the largest directories will be at the end of the output. And the rest are there in the scrollback if you want them. Or use du -sch *.

    – Peter Cordes
    May 25 at 17:14
















Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f520810%2fhow-to-pin-point-large-file-eating-space-in-fedora-18%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes








4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









10














My magic command in such situation is :



du -m . --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20


To use this :





  1. cd into the top-level directory containing the files eating space. This can be / if you have no clue ;-)

  2. run du -m . --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20. This will list the 20 biggest subdirectories of the current directory, sorted by decreasing size.


  3. cd into the biggest directory and repeat the du ... command until you find the BIG file(s)






share|improve this answer





















  • 6





    I would consider adding -x to du for this question's scenario. This prevents it from crossing filesystem boundaries and so doesn't include the other filesystems on the machine like /home, or any nfs mounts/mounted ISO files etc, all of which presumably OP would want to exclude since they are trying to find something taking up space on a particular filesystem.

    – Kefka
    May 24 at 16:42








  • 6





    That's an interesting choice of options. Personally, I rather du -sh */ | sort -nh. du -m would round up everything to at least a megabyte. du -h will display sizes with suffixes like K, M, and G. sort -h will take these suffixes into account. Chosing du -s */ instead of du --max-depth=1 . allows one to refine the glob. Using head discards results that might have taken work add up, so I think it's better to let everything be printed in case the sizes are evenly distributed. Avoiding sort -r puts the bigger results closer to the new command line prompt.

    – JoL
    May 24 at 18:53













  • du -sch * | sort -h | less is a handy equivalent for --max-depth=1

    – Peter Cordes
    May 25 at 17:16











  • thanks for this i manage to isolate all directories until i have pinpointed the right location.

    – hyperman
    May 29 at 4:43
















10














My magic command in such situation is :



du -m . --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20


To use this :





  1. cd into the top-level directory containing the files eating space. This can be / if you have no clue ;-)

  2. run du -m . --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20. This will list the 20 biggest subdirectories of the current directory, sorted by decreasing size.


  3. cd into the biggest directory and repeat the du ... command until you find the BIG file(s)






share|improve this answer





















  • 6





    I would consider adding -x to du for this question's scenario. This prevents it from crossing filesystem boundaries and so doesn't include the other filesystems on the machine like /home, or any nfs mounts/mounted ISO files etc, all of which presumably OP would want to exclude since they are trying to find something taking up space on a particular filesystem.

    – Kefka
    May 24 at 16:42








  • 6





    That's an interesting choice of options. Personally, I rather du -sh */ | sort -nh. du -m would round up everything to at least a megabyte. du -h will display sizes with suffixes like K, M, and G. sort -h will take these suffixes into account. Chosing du -s */ instead of du --max-depth=1 . allows one to refine the glob. Using head discards results that might have taken work add up, so I think it's better to let everything be printed in case the sizes are evenly distributed. Avoiding sort -r puts the bigger results closer to the new command line prompt.

    – JoL
    May 24 at 18:53













  • du -sch * | sort -h | less is a handy equivalent for --max-depth=1

    – Peter Cordes
    May 25 at 17:16











  • thanks for this i manage to isolate all directories until i have pinpointed the right location.

    – hyperman
    May 29 at 4:43














10












10








10







My magic command in such situation is :



du -m . --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20


To use this :





  1. cd into the top-level directory containing the files eating space. This can be / if you have no clue ;-)

  2. run du -m . --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20. This will list the 20 biggest subdirectories of the current directory, sorted by decreasing size.


  3. cd into the biggest directory and repeat the du ... command until you find the BIG file(s)






share|improve this answer













My magic command in such situation is :



du -m . --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20


To use this :





  1. cd into the top-level directory containing the files eating space. This can be / if you have no clue ;-)

  2. run du -m . --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20. This will list the 20 biggest subdirectories of the current directory, sorted by decreasing size.


  3. cd into the biggest directory and repeat the du ... command until you find the BIG file(s)







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered May 24 at 8:24









HttqmHttqm

8193 silver badges12 bronze badges




8193 silver badges12 bronze badges











  • 6





    I would consider adding -x to du for this question's scenario. This prevents it from crossing filesystem boundaries and so doesn't include the other filesystems on the machine like /home, or any nfs mounts/mounted ISO files etc, all of which presumably OP would want to exclude since they are trying to find something taking up space on a particular filesystem.

    – Kefka
    May 24 at 16:42








  • 6





    That's an interesting choice of options. Personally, I rather du -sh */ | sort -nh. du -m would round up everything to at least a megabyte. du -h will display sizes with suffixes like K, M, and G. sort -h will take these suffixes into account. Chosing du -s */ instead of du --max-depth=1 . allows one to refine the glob. Using head discards results that might have taken work add up, so I think it's better to let everything be printed in case the sizes are evenly distributed. Avoiding sort -r puts the bigger results closer to the new command line prompt.

    – JoL
    May 24 at 18:53













  • du -sch * | sort -h | less is a handy equivalent for --max-depth=1

    – Peter Cordes
    May 25 at 17:16











  • thanks for this i manage to isolate all directories until i have pinpointed the right location.

    – hyperman
    May 29 at 4:43














  • 6





    I would consider adding -x to du for this question's scenario. This prevents it from crossing filesystem boundaries and so doesn't include the other filesystems on the machine like /home, or any nfs mounts/mounted ISO files etc, all of which presumably OP would want to exclude since they are trying to find something taking up space on a particular filesystem.

    – Kefka
    May 24 at 16:42








  • 6





    That's an interesting choice of options. Personally, I rather du -sh */ | sort -nh. du -m would round up everything to at least a megabyte. du -h will display sizes with suffixes like K, M, and G. sort -h will take these suffixes into account. Chosing du -s */ instead of du --max-depth=1 . allows one to refine the glob. Using head discards results that might have taken work add up, so I think it's better to let everything be printed in case the sizes are evenly distributed. Avoiding sort -r puts the bigger results closer to the new command line prompt.

    – JoL
    May 24 at 18:53













  • du -sch * | sort -h | less is a handy equivalent for --max-depth=1

    – Peter Cordes
    May 25 at 17:16











  • thanks for this i manage to isolate all directories until i have pinpointed the right location.

    – hyperman
    May 29 at 4:43








6




6





I would consider adding -x to du for this question's scenario. This prevents it from crossing filesystem boundaries and so doesn't include the other filesystems on the machine like /home, or any nfs mounts/mounted ISO files etc, all of which presumably OP would want to exclude since they are trying to find something taking up space on a particular filesystem.

– Kefka
May 24 at 16:42







I would consider adding -x to du for this question's scenario. This prevents it from crossing filesystem boundaries and so doesn't include the other filesystems on the machine like /home, or any nfs mounts/mounted ISO files etc, all of which presumably OP would want to exclude since they are trying to find something taking up space on a particular filesystem.

– Kefka
May 24 at 16:42






6




6





That's an interesting choice of options. Personally, I rather du -sh */ | sort -nh. du -m would round up everything to at least a megabyte. du -h will display sizes with suffixes like K, M, and G. sort -h will take these suffixes into account. Chosing du -s */ instead of du --max-depth=1 . allows one to refine the glob. Using head discards results that might have taken work add up, so I think it's better to let everything be printed in case the sizes are evenly distributed. Avoiding sort -r puts the bigger results closer to the new command line prompt.

– JoL
May 24 at 18:53







That's an interesting choice of options. Personally, I rather du -sh */ | sort -nh. du -m would round up everything to at least a megabyte. du -h will display sizes with suffixes like K, M, and G. sort -h will take these suffixes into account. Chosing du -s */ instead of du --max-depth=1 . allows one to refine the glob. Using head discards results that might have taken work add up, so I think it's better to let everything be printed in case the sizes are evenly distributed. Avoiding sort -r puts the bigger results closer to the new command line prompt.

– JoL
May 24 at 18:53















du -sch * | sort -h | less is a handy equivalent for --max-depth=1

– Peter Cordes
May 25 at 17:16





du -sch * | sort -h | less is a handy equivalent for --max-depth=1

– Peter Cordes
May 25 at 17:16













thanks for this i manage to isolate all directories until i have pinpointed the right location.

– hyperman
May 29 at 4:43





thanks for this i manage to isolate all directories until i have pinpointed the right location.

– hyperman
May 29 at 4:43













10














ncdu is a great tool for this kind of problem. Here's the corresponding package.



enter image description hereenter image description here



You can use -x if you want to stay on only one filesystem, without following symlinks. For example, as root:



ncdu -x /home


It's the command line equivalent of DaisyDisk, Baobab or WinDirStat.



It might take a long time to scan a large folders, but once it's done it should be very fast to find the largest files.






share|improve this answer























  • 1





    thank you i used this on my development server it was easy using it, but sadly i cant install it on our production.

    – hyperman
    May 29 at 4:44


















10














ncdu is a great tool for this kind of problem. Here's the corresponding package.



enter image description hereenter image description here



You can use -x if you want to stay on only one filesystem, without following symlinks. For example, as root:



ncdu -x /home


It's the command line equivalent of DaisyDisk, Baobab or WinDirStat.



It might take a long time to scan a large folders, but once it's done it should be very fast to find the largest files.






share|improve this answer























  • 1





    thank you i used this on my development server it was easy using it, but sadly i cant install it on our production.

    – hyperman
    May 29 at 4:44
















10












10








10







ncdu is a great tool for this kind of problem. Here's the corresponding package.



enter image description hereenter image description here



You can use -x if you want to stay on only one filesystem, without following symlinks. For example, as root:



ncdu -x /home


It's the command line equivalent of DaisyDisk, Baobab or WinDirStat.



It might take a long time to scan a large folders, but once it's done it should be very fast to find the largest files.






share|improve this answer















ncdu is a great tool for this kind of problem. Here's the corresponding package.



enter image description hereenter image description here



You can use -x if you want to stay on only one filesystem, without following symlinks. For example, as root:



ncdu -x /home


It's the command line equivalent of DaisyDisk, Baobab or WinDirStat.



It might take a long time to scan a large folders, but once it's done it should be very fast to find the largest files.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited May 24 at 16:37

























answered May 24 at 16:32









Eric DuminilEric Duminil

2661 silver badge6 bronze badges




2661 silver badge6 bronze badges











  • 1





    thank you i used this on my development server it was easy using it, but sadly i cant install it on our production.

    – hyperman
    May 29 at 4:44
















  • 1





    thank you i used this on my development server it was easy using it, but sadly i cant install it on our production.

    – hyperman
    May 29 at 4:44










1




1





thank you i used this on my development server it was easy using it, but sadly i cant install it on our production.

– hyperman
May 29 at 4:44







thank you i used this on my development server it was easy using it, but sadly i cant install it on our production.

– hyperman
May 29 at 4:44













8














If you have a feel for the actual size of the file you can find files larger than a specific size.



Eg, to find files larger than 10 MiB:



find /mounted/drive -size +10M


Or



find /mounted/drive -size +10M -exec ls -lh {} +




Httqm's suggestion is also good if the problem isn't one big file but a large collection of smaller files. That is use du to show directory totals. Limiting with --max-depth is very useful with large directory trees:



du -m some/directory --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20
du some/directory --max-depth=1 | sort -n | tail -21


Will break a single directory down into sub-directories, the second of these gives you the total for the directory you're listing as well.






share|improve this answer




























  • Instead of -exec ls .. you can also use -ls for some more info.

    – eckes
    May 25 at 11:19
















8














If you have a feel for the actual size of the file you can find files larger than a specific size.



Eg, to find files larger than 10 MiB:



find /mounted/drive -size +10M


Or



find /mounted/drive -size +10M -exec ls -lh {} +




Httqm's suggestion is also good if the problem isn't one big file but a large collection of smaller files. That is use du to show directory totals. Limiting with --max-depth is very useful with large directory trees:



du -m some/directory --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20
du some/directory --max-depth=1 | sort -n | tail -21


Will break a single directory down into sub-directories, the second of these gives you the total for the directory you're listing as well.






share|improve this answer




























  • Instead of -exec ls .. you can also use -ls for some more info.

    – eckes
    May 25 at 11:19














8












8








8







If you have a feel for the actual size of the file you can find files larger than a specific size.



Eg, to find files larger than 10 MiB:



find /mounted/drive -size +10M


Or



find /mounted/drive -size +10M -exec ls -lh {} +




Httqm's suggestion is also good if the problem isn't one big file but a large collection of smaller files. That is use du to show directory totals. Limiting with --max-depth is very useful with large directory trees:



du -m some/directory --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20
du some/directory --max-depth=1 | sort -n | tail -21


Will break a single directory down into sub-directories, the second of these gives you the total for the directory you're listing as well.






share|improve this answer















If you have a feel for the actual size of the file you can find files larger than a specific size.



Eg, to find files larger than 10 MiB:



find /mounted/drive -size +10M


Or



find /mounted/drive -size +10M -exec ls -lh {} +




Httqm's suggestion is also good if the problem isn't one big file but a large collection of smaller files. That is use du to show directory totals. Limiting with --max-depth is very useful with large directory trees:



du -m some/directory --max-depth=1 | sort -nr | head -20
du some/directory --max-depth=1 | sort -n | tail -21


Will break a single directory down into sub-directories, the second of these gives you the total for the directory you're listing as well.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited May 24 at 9:00

























answered May 24 at 8:54









Philip CoulingPhilip Couling

4,2401 gold badge16 silver badges27 bronze badges




4,2401 gold badge16 silver badges27 bronze badges
















  • Instead of -exec ls .. you can also use -ls for some more info.

    – eckes
    May 25 at 11:19



















  • Instead of -exec ls .. you can also use -ls for some more info.

    – eckes
    May 25 at 11:19

















Instead of -exec ls .. you can also use -ls for some more info.

– eckes
May 25 at 11:19





Instead of -exec ls .. you can also use -ls for some more info.

– eckes
May 25 at 11:19











5














Use this command to find out which directories are the largest:



du -a / | sort -n -r | head 





share|improve this answer


























  • I often use du -h | sort -h | less. Or leave out the less, because the largest directories will be at the end of the output. And the rest are there in the scrollback if you want them. Or use du -sch *.

    – Peter Cordes
    May 25 at 17:14


















5














Use this command to find out which directories are the largest:



du -a / | sort -n -r | head 





share|improve this answer


























  • I often use du -h | sort -h | less. Or leave out the less, because the largest directories will be at the end of the output. And the rest are there in the scrollback if you want them. Or use du -sch *.

    – Peter Cordes
    May 25 at 17:14
















5












5








5







Use this command to find out which directories are the largest:



du -a / | sort -n -r | head 





share|improve this answer













Use this command to find out which directories are the largest:



du -a / | sort -n -r | head 






share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered May 24 at 8:24









dr01dr01

17.4k11 gold badges56 silver badges78 bronze badges




17.4k11 gold badges56 silver badges78 bronze badges
















  • I often use du -h | sort -h | less. Or leave out the less, because the largest directories will be at the end of the output. And the rest are there in the scrollback if you want them. Or use du -sch *.

    – Peter Cordes
    May 25 at 17:14





















  • I often use du -h | sort -h | less. Or leave out the less, because the largest directories will be at the end of the output. And the rest are there in the scrollback if you want them. Or use du -sch *.

    – Peter Cordes
    May 25 at 17:14



















I often use du -h | sort -h | less. Or leave out the less, because the largest directories will be at the end of the output. And the rest are there in the scrollback if you want them. Or use du -sch *.

– Peter Cordes
May 25 at 17:14







I often use du -h | sort -h | less. Or leave out the less, because the largest directories will be at the end of the output. And the rest are there in the scrollback if you want them. Or use du -sch *.

– Peter Cordes
May 25 at 17:14




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f520810%2fhow-to-pin-point-large-file-eating-space-in-fedora-18%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Bruad Bilen | Luke uk diar | NawigatsjuunCommonskategorii: BruadCommonskategorii: RunstükenWikiquote: Bruad

Modern approach to radio buttons

A word for worn pool table felt