Re: btrfs thinks fs is full, though 11GB should be still free

[Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.org>]

On Fri, 2024-01-05 at 17:37 +1030, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> but pretty hard to find a
> good way to improve:

I guess it would not be an alternative to do the work on truncate (i.e.
check whether a lot is wasted and if so, create a new extent with just
the right size), because that would need a full re-write of the
extent... or would it?

Also, a while ago in one of my mails I saw that:
$ cat affected-file > new-file
would also cause new-file to be affected... which I found pretty
strange.

Any idea why that happens?



> My previous guess is totally wrong, it has nothing to do with
> NODATACOW/PREALLOC flags at all.
> 
> It's a defrag only problem.

Sure, but I meant, if a file is NODATACOW and would be prealloced to a
large size and then truncated - would it also loose the extra space?


And do you think that other CoW fs would be affected, too? IIRC XFS is
also about to get CoW features... so may it's simply an IO pattern that
developers need to avoid with modern filesystems.


Cheers,
Chris-