linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Goffredo Baroncelli <kreijack@inwind.it>
To: Roman Mamedov <rm@romanrm.ru>
Cc: kreijack@libero.it, "Sébastien Maury" <sebastien.maury@inserm.fr>,
	linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, "Hugo Mills" <hugo@carfax.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC] btrfs fi df output [Was Re: BTRF - Storage Usage]
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 18:44:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5065D3D7.8080101@inwind.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120928091759.6d096016@natsu>

On 09/28/2012 05:17 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 23:02:35 +0200
> Goffredo Baroncelli<kreijack@libero.it>  wrote:
>
>> Sorry for the space error:
>> Below a more correct example
>>
>> $ btrfs filesystem disk-free /
>> Summary:
>>      Total:             	        135.00GB
>>      Allocated:             	 10.51GB
>>      Unallocated:            	124.49GB
>>      Free_(Estimated)              86.56GB
>>      Average_disk_efficiency:         62 %
>
> How do you estimate "Free" here? Sorry I didn't check the source code in git,
> but from the "Details" below nothing leads me to believe that this FS is
> doomed to only be able to usefully utilize only ~86GB of the partition, and not
> more.


The estimation is made on the basis of the real allocated space on the 
disk and the available space.

In the example we know that BTRFS allocate:
- 4GB	in Single mode (4GB available, 2.16GB used)
- 16MB  in DUP mode (so  16/2=8MB available, 4kb used)
- 4MB   in Single mode (4MB available)
- 6GB   in DUP mode (6/2=3GB available, 429MB used)
- 8MB   in Single mode (8MB available)


So BTRFS allocated on disk 4GB+16MB+4MB+6GB+8MB = ~10GB, but the space 
availabled (regarding these allocated chunks) is 4GB+8MB+4MB+3GB+8MB = ~7GB.

This means that the ration of space physically allocated on the disk and 
the space available is 7GB/10GB = 0.7 . So on 135GB of disk, only 94GB 
are available.

Yes my previous 0.62 was wrong. The real ratio is 0.7.


> Are you ready to answer the flood of questions from people why their disk is
> only 62% efficient, and how to tune it to 100%? :-)

I don't understand your question: by default BTRFS store all metadata 
DUP-ed, this means that on the disk the space allocated are 2 times the 
space required. Because on BTRFS the metadata are a lot, this means that 
BTRFS is not so efficiency as other file-systems. This is a well know fact.

If you want to use all the space with the maximum efficiency, you could 
format the filesystem with the options "-m single".


>
> Why use underscores instead of spaces?

Simplify the parsing in scripts


>
>>
>> Details:
>>      Chunk-type    Mode       Allocated        Used        Free
>>      ----------    ----       ---------    --------   ---------
>>      Data          Single        4.01GB      2.16GB      1.87GB
>>      System        DUP          16.00MB      4.00KB      7.99MB
>>      System        Single        4.00MB        0.00      4.00MB
>>      Metadata      DUP           6.00GB    429.16MB      2.57GB
>>      Metadata      Single        8.00MB        0.00      8.00MB
>


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-09-28 16:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-27 10:44 BTRF - Storage Usage Sébastien Maury
2012-09-27 11:09 ` Hugo Mills
2012-09-27 11:25   ` Sébastien Maury
2012-09-27 11:43     ` Hugo Mills
2012-09-27 11:52       ` Sébastien Maury
2012-09-27 20:39 ` [RFC] btrfs fi df output [Was Re: BTRF - Storage Usage] Goffredo Baroncelli
2012-09-27 21:02   ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2012-09-28  3:17     ` Roman Mamedov
2012-09-28  8:58       ` Hugo Mills
2012-09-28 17:27         ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2012-09-28 20:13           ` Hugo Mills
2012-09-28 21:26             ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2012-09-29  7:19             ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2012-09-29  9:59               ` Sébastien Maury
2012-09-29 11:51                 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2012-11-12 18:16         ` Jan Engelhardt
2012-09-28 16:44       ` Goffredo Baroncelli [this message]
2012-09-28 18:02         ` Roman Mamedov
2012-09-28 19:38           ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2012-09-28 20:20           ` Hugo Mills
2012-09-28 21:26             ` Wade Cline

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5065D3D7.8080101@inwind.it \
    --to=kreijack@inwind.it \
    --cc=hugo@carfax.org.uk \
    --cc=kreijack@libero.it \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rm@romanrm.ru \
    --cc=sebastien.maury@inserm.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).