# Index size mismatch in Kibana and linux console

**URL:** <https://discuss.elastic.co/t/index-size-mismatch-in-kibana-and-linux-console/149048>\
**Category:** Elasticsearch\
**Created:** [September 19, 2018, 3:12am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/index-size-mismatch-in-kibana-and-linux-console/149048 "2018-09-19T03:12:39Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Hari\_Prasad](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/hari_prasad/32/56784_2.png) [@Hari\_Prasad](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Hari_Prasad)\
**Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 3:12am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/index-size-mismatch-in-kibana-and-linux-console/149048/1 "2018-09-19T03:12:39Z")

</div>

I am using Elasticsearch 6.3.2 to index a bunch of log file which are around 1.8 to 2 GB in size. The disk size shown in Kibana are close the expected size (size of input) but a **du -sh** on the data folder via the console shows a growth of around 5 to 7 GB for each of the input file.

Kindly help me understand if this is an expected behaviour or there is something wrong about it?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/3X/1/a/1ac57faf039f6b580b3f104ef42a2a89e41014de.png) [@system](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/system)\
**Post date:** [October 17, 2018, 3:12am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/index-size-mismatch-in-kibana-and-linux-console/149048/2 "2018-10-17T03:12:45Z")

</div>

This topic was automatically closed 28 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.