From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:62344 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751066AbaC1Hcq (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Mar 2014 03:32:46 -0400 Message-ID: <53352599.6000407@friedels.name> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 08:32:41 +0100 From: Hendrik Friedel MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hugo Mills , Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: free space inode generation (0) did not match free space cache generation References: <532DF38B.40409@friedels.name> <532DFDAB.7000600@friedels.name> <53309AF9.8090203@friedels.name> <5331E10E.6080806@friedels.name> <20140325201020.GC7442@carfax.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20140325201020.GC7442@carfax.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hello, after merely 5 days, I have the same Problem: root@homeserver:~# ./btrfs/integration/devel/btrfs fi df /mnt/test1/ Disk size: 29.50GiB Disk allocated: 29.30GiB Disk unallocated: 202.00MiB Used: 13.84GiB Free (Estimated): 929.95MiB (Max: 1.01GiB, min: 929.95MiB) Data to disk ratio: 50 % root@homeserver:~# ./btrfs/integration/devel/btrfs fi show /mnt/test1/ Label: 'ROOT_BTRFS_RAID' uuid: a2d5f2db-04ca-413a-aee1-cb754aa8fba5 Total devices 2 FS bytes used 13.84GiB devid 1 size 14.85GiB used 14.65GiB path /dev/sde2 devid 2 size 14.65GiB used 14.65GiB path /dev/sdd2 root@homeserver:~# ./btrfs/integration/devel/btrfs fi df /mnt/test1/ Disk size: 29.50GiB Disk allocated: 29.30GiB Disk unallocated: 202.00MiB Used: 13.84GiB Free (Estimated): 929.95MiB (Max: 1.01GiB, min: 929.95MiB) Data to disk ratio: 50 % root@homeserver:~# ./btrfs/integration/devel/btrfs fi show /mnt/test1/ Label: 'ROOT_BTRFS_RAID' uuid: a2d5f2db-04ca-413a-aee1-cb754aa8fba5 Total devices 2 FS bytes used 13.84GiB devid 1 size 14.85GiB used 14.65GiB path /dev/sde2 devid 2 size 14.65GiB used 14.65GiB path /dev/sdd2 Btrfs this-will-become-v3.13-48-g57c3600 root@homeserver:~# time ./btrfs/integration/devel/btrfs balance start -dusage=0 /mnt/test1 Done, had to relocate 0 out of 22 chunks real 0m2.734s user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.022s I increased dusage until I got: root@homeserver:~# time ./btrfs/integration/devel/btrfs balance start -dusage=90 /mnt/test1 ERROR: error during balancing '/mnt/test1' - No space left on device There may be more info in syslog - try dmesg | tail Before I could do a full balance I had to delete all Snapshots: ~20 on my root subvolume ~40 on my /home and /root subvolume I do not find this a extraordinary high number of snapshots. Also others should have higher numbers, when they use snapper. Any Idea of what could be the reason here? Regards, Hendrik Am 25.03.2014 21:10, schrieb Hugo Mills: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 09:03:26PM +0100, Hendrik Friedel wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> Well, given the relative immaturity of btrfs as a filesystem at this >>> point in its lifetime, I think it's acceptable/tolerable. However, for a >>> filesystem feted[1] to ultimately replace the ext* series as an assumed >>> Linux default, I'd definitely argue that the current situation should be >>> changed such that btrfs can automatically manage its own de-allocation at >>> some point, yes, and that said "some point" really needs to come before >>> that point at which btrfs can be considered an appropriate replacement >>> for ext2/3/4 as the assumed default Linux filesystem of the day. >> >> Agreed! I hope, this is on the ToDo List?! > > https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Block_group_reclaim > > Yes. :) > >>> [1] feted: celebrated, honored. I had to look it up to be sure my >>> intuition on usage was correct, and indeed I had spelled it wrong >> >> :-) > > Did you mean "fated": intended, destined? > > Hugo. > -- Hendrik Friedel Auf dem Brink 12 28844 Weyhe Mobil 0178 1874363