Can somebody explain this? du & ls showing different sizes

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Sun, 2009-02-15 at 23:11 +0000, Vijay Gill wrote:
> 2009/2/15 Rick <ellis at spinics.net>:
> > In article <60fdb1ad0902151205v6ef67c07v128f0c88f5895240 at mail.gmail.com>,
> > Vijay Gill  <fedora-list at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Running du -h tells that the file occupies 512M but ls -l tells that
> >>the file is a lot smaller.
> >
> > Apples and oranges. You get the file *size* with ls and the disk usage
> > with du. They aren't the same thing.
> >
> > --
> > http://yosemitenews.info/
> >
> > --
> > fedora-list mailing list
> > fedora-list at redhat.com
> > To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
> > Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
> >
> 
> Thanks but I knew that already. I was just curious why 512Mbytes is
> allocated to a file so small? Also I have provided allocsize which is
> definitely not 512M!

That could be because you're using XFS.

poc