On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 07:39:59AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > 20.04.2019 23:19, Adam Borowski пишет: > > On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 12:46:16PM +0200, Juergen Sauer wrote: > >> I wish a happy Easer Days before :) > > > > Same to you! > > > >> During my tests with BTRFS as Raid5 setup, I found a courious little > >> "problem". > > > >> Total devices 3 FS bytes used 9.98TiB > >> devid 1 size 9.09TiB used 4.99TiB path /dev/sdb1 > >> devid 2 size 5.46TiB used 4.99TiB path /dev/sdc1 > >> devid 3 size 5.46TiB used 4.99TiB path /dev/sde1 > > > >> All patitioins sdb1 sdc1 sde1 are the same size: 9.0 TiB. But BTRFS ist > >> not using the bigger space on sdc1, sde1, there is only 5.46 TiB used, > >> even there are 9.0 Tib Avaible, so 4.0 TiB are unused. > > > > It's working as expected: while btrfs does RAID per block group rather than > > per whole block device, there's no way to place a raid5 block group in a way > > that doesn't require at least 3 devices. This means with a 3-disk setup the > > space utilized will be only as big as the smallest one. > > > > But as reported, all drives were replaced by larger ones but only one > drive shows increased size: "All patitioins sdb1 sdc1 sde1 are the same > size".
Did you do:
btrfs fi resize 2:max /path/to/fs
btrfs fi resize 3:max /path/to/fs
It looks like you only did
btrfs fi resize 1:max /path/to/fs
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
