On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 05:42:33PM +0200, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: > On 07/06/16 17:20, Hugo Mills wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 12:16:01AM +0900, Wang Shilong wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Holger Hoffstätte > >> <hol...@applied-asynchrony.com> wrote: > >>> On 07/06/16 14:25, Wang Shilong wrote: > >>>> 'btrfs file du' is a very useful tool to watch my system > >>>> file usage with snapshot aware. > >>>> > >>>> when trying to run following commands: > >>>> [root@localhost btrfs-progs]# btrfs file du / > >>>> Total Exclusive Set shared Filename > >>>> ERROR: Failed to lookup root id - Inappropriate ioctl for device > >>>> ERROR: cannot check space of '/': Unknown error -1 > >>>> > >>>> and My Filesystem looks like this: > >>>> [root@localhost btrfs-progs]# df -Th > >>>> Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > >>>> devtmpfs devtmpfs 16G 0 16G 0% /dev > >>>> tmpfs tmpfs 16G 368K 16G 1% /dev/shm > >>>> tmpfs tmpfs 16G 1.4M 16G 1% /run > >>>> tmpfs tmpfs 16G 0 16G 0% /sys/fs/cgroup > >>>> /dev/sda3 btrfs 60G 19G 40G 33% / > >>>> tmpfs tmpfs 16G 332K 16G 1% /tmp > >>>> /dev/sdc btrfs 2.8T 166G 1.7T 9% /data > >>>> /dev/sda2 xfs 2.0G 452M 1.6G 23% /boot > >>>> /dev/sda1 vfat 1.9G 11M 1.9G 1% /boot/efi > >>>> tmpfs tmpfs 3.2G 24K 3.2G 1% /run/user/1000 > >>>> > >>>> So I installed Btrfs as my root partition, but boot partition > >>>> can be other fs. > >>>> > >>>> We can Let btrfs tool aware of this is not a btrfs file or > >>>> directory and skip those files, so that someone like me > >>>> could just run 'btrfs file du /' to scan all btrfs filesystems. > >>>> > >>>> After patch, it will look like: > >>>> Total Exclusive Set shared Filename > >>>> skipping not btrfs dir/file: boot > >>>> skipping not btrfs dir/file: dev > >>>> skipping not btrfs dir/file: proc > >>>> skipping not btrfs dir/file: run > >>>> skipping not btrfs dir/file: sys > >>>> 0.00B 0.00B - //root/.bash_logout > >>>> 0.00B 0.00B - //root/.bash_profile > >>>> 0.00B 0.00B - //root/.bashrc > >>>> 0.00B 0.00B - //root/.cshrc > >>>> 0.00B 0.00B - //root/.tcshrc > >>>> > >>>> This works for me to analysis system usage and analysis > >>>> performaces. > >>> > >>> This is great, but can we please skip the "skipping .." messages? > >>> Maybe it's just me but I really don't see the value of printing them > >>> when they don't contribute to the result. > >>> They also mess up the display. :) > >> > >> I don't have a taste whether it needed or not, because it is somehow > >> useful to let users know some files/directories skipped.... > > When you run "find /path -type d" you don't get messages for all the > things you just didn't want to find either.
No, but you do get messages about unreadable directories from find. Your example above would be "You asked for X and <thing> isn't an X". That's not what these messages are about -- what we're seeing here is "I tried to do what you asked to <thing>, but couldn't". Hugo. > > At the absolute minimum, I think that these messages should go to > > stderr (like du does when it deosn't have permissions), and should go > > away with -q. They're still irritating, but at least you can get rid > > of them easily. > > If anything this should require a --verbose, not the other way > around. Maybe instead of breaking the output just indicate the > special status via "-- --" values, or default to 0.00? > Still, we're explicitly only interested in btrfs stuff and not > anything else, so printing non-information can only yield noise. > > This is very much orthogonal to not printing anything after an > otherwise successful command execution. > > -h > > -- Hugo Mills | "There's a Martian war machine outside -- they want hugo@... carfax.org.uk | to talk to you about a cure for the common cold." http://carfax.org.uk/ | PGP: E2AB1DE4 | Stephen Franklin, Babylon 5
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
