From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([59.151.112.132]:17549 "EHLO heian.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750705AbaJ0Erb convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Oct 2014 00:47:31 -0400 Message-ID: <544DCECB.7060007@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:49:15 +0800 From: Qu Wenruo MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Murphy CC: Jasper Verberk , "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Problem converting data raid0 to raid1: enospc errors during balance References: <544DA288.8040907@cn.fujitsu.com> <1304C47B-8A9D-4AEA-B64A-C6566C77A5E1@colorremedies.com> In-Reply-To: <1304C47B-8A9D-4AEA-B64A-C6566C77A5E1@colorremedies.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Problem converting data raid0 to raid1: enospc errors during balance From: Chris Murphy To: Qu Wenruo Date: 2014年10月27日 12:40 > On Oct 26, 2014, at 7:40 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Although I'm not completely sure, but it seems that, you really ran out of space. >> >> [1] Your array won't hold raid1 for 1.97T data >> Your array used up 1.97T raid0 data, it takes 1.97T for raid0. >> But if converted to 1.97T, it will occupy 1.97T X2 = 3.94T. >> Your array are only 2.73T, it is too small to contain the data. > I'm not understanding. The btrfs fi show, shows 4x 2.73TiB devices, so that seems like it's a 10+TiB array. > > There's 2.04TiB raid0 data chunks, so roughly 500GiB per device, yet 1.94TiB is reported used per device by fi show. Confusing. > > Also it's still very confusing: Data, RAID1: total=2.85TiB, used=790.46GiB whether this means 2.85TiB out of 10TiB is allocated, or if it's twice that due to raid1. I can't ever remember this presentation detail, so again the secret decode ring where the UI doesn't expressly tell us what's going on is going to continue to be a source of confusion for users. > > > Chris Murphy Oh, I misread the output.... That turns strange now.... BTW what's the output of 'df' command? Thanks, Qu