Re: About stale qgroup auto removal behavior change

[Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>]

On 2/3/20 7:37 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> This is the reminder of how we could handle the behavior change of
> staled qgroup auto removal.
> 
> [PROBLEM]
> If btrfs has dropped one subvolume, it will not delete the level 0
> qgroup automatically, leaving the qgroup still hanging there, with all
> numbers set to 0.
> This needs manual user interaction to delete all those staled qgroups.
> 
> [SOLUTIONS]
> There are several way to solve it, all with its advantage and disadvantage.
> 
> - Auto remove them by default, and no way to keep the the staled qgroups
>    Pro: Easy to implement (already submitted)
>    Con: User has no choice to keep staled qgroups. But I could argue that
>         no one sane would want to keep them anyway.

This should have been what was done in the first place.  Nobody is using qgroups 
right now anyway as they do not work, might as well do it the correct way now so 
when they are in use we don't have to worry about it.  Thanks,

Josef