Hi, There's been discussion before on this list on the very small number of hard links supported by btrfs.[1][2] In those threads, an often asked question has been if there's a real world use case the limit breaks. Also it has been pointed out that a fix for this would need a disk format change.
As discussed in bug #15762 [3], there are certainly real-world use cases this limitation breaks. I don't usually like to bring up my pet bugs on mailing lists, and I'm sorry for doing it here, but if it indeed needs a disk format change, I think this should be considered before the format is set in stone. I won't personally lose my sleep if this is not fixed - I can use other filesystems for backuppc and other similar systems, although I'd be disappointed to see a production backup system unexpectedly fail because of this - just that I think it's better to think about this before things are set in stone. I'd venture to guess that if I have hit this limit with the very small amount of btrfs use I've done, thousands of others are going to hit it when btrfs is the default filesystem of distributions. Sami [1] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/4589 [2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/3427 [3] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15762
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature