I can understand that ls is giving you the "logical" size of the file and du the "physical" size of the file (in-disk footprint).
But then, how do you explain that, when using a mirrored pool, ls and du returns exactly the same size. According to your reasoning, du should return twice the logical size returned by ls. The main problem (my opinion) is the lack of consistency. This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
