Henk Slager posted on Sun, 04 Dec 2016 23:17:23 +0100 as excerpted:
> There are no btrfs changes between kernels 4.8.10 and 4.8.11. There is
> no compress mount option in my case, that is the only thing I currently
> can think of that could make your Set shared number non-zero.
Compression... mig
On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Henk Slager wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> [chris@f25s ~]$ uname -r
>> 4.8.11-300.fc25.x86_64
>> [chris@f25s ~]$ rpm -q btrfs-progs
>> btrfs-progs-4.8.5-1.fc26.x86_64
>>
>>
>> I'm not finding any pattern to this so far, bu
On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [chris@f25s ~]$ uname -r
> 4.8.11-300.fc25.x86_64
> [chris@f25s ~]$ rpm -q btrfs-progs
> btrfs-progs-4.8.5-1.fc26.x86_64
>
>
> I'm not finding any pattern to this so far, but it's definitely not
> always reliable. Here is today's exampl
Another example:
[chris@f25s ~]$ sudo btrfs fi du -s /mnt/first/everything-new
Total Exclusive Set shared Filename
367.54GiB14.21GiB 350.95GiB /mnt/first/everything-new
The problem here is that Exclusive + Shared ≠ Total. Rather those two
add up to 365.16GiB, which suggests 2.38G
Hi,
[chris@f25s ~]$ uname -r
4.8.11-300.fc25.x86_64
[chris@f25s ~]$ rpm -q btrfs-progs
btrfs-progs-4.8.5-1.fc26.x86_64
I'm not finding any pattern to this so far, but it's definitely not
always reliable. Here is today's example.
[chris@f25s ~]$ sudo btrfs fi du -s /mnt/second/jackson.2015/
