From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f53.google.com ([209.85.214.53]:35060 "EHLO mail-it0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933483AbcIVNmF (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:42:05 -0400 Received: by mail-it0-f53.google.com with SMTP id r192so157446561ita.0 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 06:42:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: BTRFS constantly reports "No space left on device" even with a huge unallocated space To: Ronan Arraes Jardim Chagas , Wang Xiaoguang , Jeff Mahoney , Josef Bacik , Qu Wenruo , Chris Murphy References: <1471023419.16857.9.camel@gmail.com> <1472734635.3137.4.camel@gmail.com> <0778dff0-cb43-d279-adb2-0e314b61110d@gmail.com> <1472747695.3137.7.camel@gmail.com> <1472827395.3713.6.camel@gmail.com> <9dee919a-0e81-5ba7-ddc6-7dcdb3a6b873@suse.com> <1472829630.3713.8.camel@gmail.com> <506f2875-8cea-2d99-3664-52ee546adcfd@suse.com> <1472844353.3083.1.camel@gmail.com> <356a9e31-047e-d4c9-00ba-d01b6e92b266@cn.fujitsu.com> <1473359094.7190.1.camel@gmail.com> <86f87e36-db70-2ad1-cc20-3537dc7e529e@suse.com> <14f71ffe-4cc7-bad1-fde1-42d5e5f90d1d@suse.com> <08737c8d-9f1b-5f18-61a0-d3bb501eb950@fb.com> <9221d4d9-d114-4ffb-d2f8-6dc2d1cdb79c@suse.com> <57DF4E44.2040506@cn.fujitsu.com> <1474550402.3206.4.camel@gmail.com> Cc: Btrfs BTRFS From: "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" Message-ID: <6ae8684e-a671-1f8d-9ad3-1299b442bd3c@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:41:53 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1474550402.3206.4.camel@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2016-09-22 09:20, Ronan Arraes Jardim Chagas wrote: > Guys, > > Something very strange happened. I have not seen the problem since > Monday, which is pretty much the first time ever I work more than 3 > days without seeing it. > > Ok, it can be a coincidence. Notice that I did not change anything > related to my work behavior. However, I did do two things: > > _ Update the kernel to 4.7.2; and > _ Created 50 dummy files with 3.0 GiB each. > > Can anyone, please, tell me if these things seems to be correlated? Most likely the kernel upgrade fixed things. It's possible that the large allocation is impacting something and making it work, but I don't think that that is very likely.