From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gourmet.spamgourmet.com ([216.75.62.102]:47271 "EHLO gourmet8.spamgourmet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934528AbbKSSpR (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Nov 2015 13:45:17 -0500 Received: from spamgourmet by gourmet7.spamgourmet.com with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzUCq-0001jN-UE for linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 18:45:16 +0000 From: linux-btrfs.tebulin@xoxy.net Subject: Re: Kernel 3.19 and still "disk full" even though 'btrfs fi df" reports enough room left? References: <564CC90F.3060703@gmail.com> <20151118190857.GY24333@carfax.org.uk> <564E085C.3060208@gmail.com> <20151119182850.GE24333@carfax.org.uk> Cc: Hugo Mills To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <564E18B9.2020509@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 19:45:13 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151119182850.GE24333@carfax.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > It's just freed up lots of space. You'll probably find that your > "total" value for data in btrfs fi df is close to (but not exactly) 66 > GiB now, if you've just run a full unfiltered balance. (The difference > being made up of metadata). I think i need to dive more into the details of btrfs to finally grasp the details here > There's a repo of "useful btrfs scripts" that David Sterba looks > after. Great pointer! I think you refer to https://github.com/kdave/btrfsmaintenance and it indeed looks very promising. >> Should I pick "btrfs show" in favor to "btrfs fi df" to learn about an impending "disk full" situation? > In the general case, you need both of them to make sense of it. Duh.... I'll better... ehh... try to find some backported btrfs-profs supporting `usage`. >> Will newer kernels do the balance on their own? > I think it's on the "projects" list on the wiki [..] aware of anyone working on it. Ok - which is another +1 for looking at David 's repo. Thanks! - Ben