You're painfully right Roman,
A freshly formatted 1 GB BTRFS filesystem on which 81 MB of data has
been put shows only ~260 MB of free space and reserves something like 2
x 380 MB of metadata.
This is absolutely ridiculous of BTRFS... :-/
Kind regards.
Le 22/07/2012 17:37, Roman Mamedov a écrit :
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 17:06:24 +0200
Swâmi Petaramesh <sw...@petaramesh.org> wrote:
Hi,
I've created a "small" BTRFS filesystem, where metadata+data are mixed
(and metadata are not DUP'ed).
Then I've enlarged the FS to 1 GB ; now I'd like to make it "normal"
with separate data and metadata, and "DUP'ed" metadata.
Considering the metadata overallocation bug [1] is still not fixed even in the
latest kernels and no one seems to care all that much, I would not recommend
doing that.
Personally I now use a "mixed" filesystem on a 1TB disk without any problems,
and do not think there's anything wrong with "mixed". In fact there's been
some talk of moving to the mixed mode allocation to be used by default, and
maybe even removing support for the "split" mode: see [2].
[1] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/17848
[2] http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-btrfs/2010/10/29/6885925
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
