From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-bk0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:38154 "EHLO mail-bk0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752651Ab2KBMBr (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Nov 2012 08:01:47 -0400 Received: by mail-bk0-f46.google.com with SMTP id jk13so1353859bkc.19 for ; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 05:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5093B658.3000007@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 13:02:32 +0100 From: Goffredo Baroncelli Reply-To: kreijack@inwind.it MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Martin Steigerwald CC: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Hugo Mills , =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGFlbCBLasO2cmxpbmc=?= , cwillu , Chris Murphy Subject: Re: [PATCH][BTRFS-PROGS] Enhance btrfs fi df References: <1351851339-19150-1-git-send-email-kreijack@inwind.it> (sfid-20121102_120303_604806_A6E2AC77) <201211021218.29778.Martin@lichtvoll.de> In-Reply-To: <201211021218.29778.Martin@lichtvoll.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2012-11-02 12:18, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > I can test on some other boxes next week, if you want to. Yes please, > > I just wonder about one thing: > > > merkaba:[…]/btrfs-progs-unstable> ./btrfs fi df / > Disk size: 18.62GB > Disk allocated: 18.62GB > Disk unallocated: 0.00 > Used: 11.26GB > Free (Estimated): 5.61GB (Max: 5.61GB, min: 5.61GB) > Data to disk ratio: 91 % > > > merkaba:[…]/btrfs-progs-unstable> ./btrfs filesystem disk-usage / > Data,Single: Size:15.10GB, Used:10.65GB > /dev/dm-0 15.10GB > > Metadata,Single: Size:8.00MB, Used:0.00 > /dev/dm-0 8.00MB > > Metadata,DUP: Size:1.75GB, Used:627.84MB > /dev/dm-0 3.50GB > > System,Single: Size:4.00MB, Used:0.00 > /dev/dm-0 4.00MB > > System,DUP: Size:8.00MB, Used:4.00KB > /dev/dm-0 16.00MB > > Unallocated: > /dev/dm-0 0.00 > > > merkaba:[…]/btrfs-progs-unstable> ./btrfs filesystem disk-usage -t / > Data Metadata Metadata System System > Single Single DUP Single DUP Unallocated > > /dev/dm-0 15.10GB 8.00MB 3.50GB 4.00MB 16.00MB 0.00 > ======= ======== ======== ====== ======= =========== > Total 15.10GB 8.00MB 1.75GB 4.00MB 8.00MB 0.00 > Used 10.65GB 0.00 627.84MB 0.00 4.00KB > > > Metadata, DUP is displayed as 3,50GB on the device level and as 1,75GB > in total. I understand the logic behind this, but this could be a bit > confusing. > > But it makes sense: Showing real allocation on device level makes sense, > cause thats what really allocated on disk. Total makes some sense, cause > thats what is being used from the tree by BTRFS. Yes, me too. At the first I was confused when you noticed this discrepancy. So I have to admit that it is not so obvious to understand. However we didn't find any way to make it more clear... > It still looks confusing at first… We could use "Chunk(s) capacity" instead of total/size ? I would like an opinion from a "english people" point of view.. GB -- gpg @keyserver.linux.it: Goffredo Baroncelli (kreijackATinwind.it> Key fingerprint BBF5 1610 0B64 DAC6 5F7D 17B2 0EDA 9B37 8B82 E0B5