Skip to content

Table for mount:size unclear for mutliple mounts, single volume #1155

Open
@CollierCZ

Description

@CollierCZ

Based on some confusion I saw from others recently, it seems the table returned for the command mount:size is unclear. For example, this table is returned for three mounts on on volume:

+----------+-----------+---------+-----------+-----------+--------+
| Mount(s) | Size(s)   | Disk    | Used      | Available | % Used |
+----------+-----------+---------+-----------+-----------+--------+
| data     | 4.1 MiB   | 1.9 GiB | 238.1 MiB | 1.7 GiB   | 12.2%  |
| data.ms  | 221.4 MiB |         |           |           |        |
| output   | 6.6 MiB   |         |           |           |        |
+----------+-----------+---------+-----------+-----------+--------+

At first glance, this appears to be a table, which would mean the items in the first row only apply to that row. But really, it's about the disk that applies to all items in that row.

It seems easy enough to split them into two tables, like so:

+---------+-----------+
| Mount   | Size      |
+---------+-----------+
| data    | 4.1 MiB   |
| data.ms | 221.4 MiB |
| output  | 6.6 MiB   |
+---------+-----------+
+---------+-----------+-----------+--------+
| Disk    | Used      | Available | % Used |
+---------+-----------+-----------+--------+
| 1.9 GiB | 238.1 MiB | 1.7 GiB   | 12.2%  |
+---------+-----------+-----------+--------+

That's more accurate. But it doesn't work well when there are multiple volumes and the information is actually tabular. So I don't know what the solution should be, but ideally, it shouldn't be like the table in the first example.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions