From: "Brian J. Murrell" <brian@interlinx.bc.ca>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: filesystem full when it's not? out of inodes? huh?
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 06:50:41 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <jiqc6i$e2$1@dough.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120226110044.GA18898@carfax.org.uk>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1477 bytes --]
On 12-02-26 06:00 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
>
> The option that nobody's mentioned yet is to use mixed mode. This
> is the -M or --mixed option when you create the filesystem. It's
> designed specifically for small filesystems, and removes the
> data/metadata split for more efficient packing.
Cool.
> As mentioned before, you probably need to upgrade to 3.2 or 3.3-rc5
> anyway. There were quite a few fixes in the ENOSPC/allocation area
> since then.
I've upgraded to the Ubuntu Precise kernel which looks to be 3.2.6 with
btrfs-tools 0.19+20100601-3ubuntu3 so that would look like a btrfs-progs
snapshot from 2010-06-01 and (unsurprisingly) I don't see the -M option
in mkfs.btrfs.
So I went digging and I just wanted to verify what I think I am seeing.
Looking at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git;a=commit;h=67377734fd24c32cbdfeb697c2e2bd7fed519e75
it would appear that the mixed data+metadata code landed in the kernel
back in Sep, of 2010, is that correct?
And looking at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git;a=commit;h=b8802ae3fa0c70d4cfc3287ed07479925973b0ac
the userspace support for this landed in Dec. of 2010, is that right?
If my archeology is correct, then I only need to update my btrfs-tools,
yes? Is 2010-06-01 really the last time the tools were considered
stable or are Ubuntu just being conservative and/or lazy about updating?
Cheers,
b.
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-02 11:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-26 1:55 filesystem full when it's not? out of inodes? huh? Brian J. Murrell
2012-02-26 2:10 ` Fahrzin Hemmati
2012-02-26 2:16 ` Brian J. Murrell
2012-02-26 2:37 ` Fahrzin Hemmati
2012-02-26 3:57 ` Brian J. Murrell
2012-02-26 4:05 ` Fahrzin Hemmati
2012-03-09 22:02 ` Johannes Hirte
2012-02-26 8:52 ` Duncan
2012-02-26 9:10 ` Helmut Hullen
2012-02-26 9:41 ` Duncan
2012-03-03 10:25 ` Chris Samuel
2012-02-26 5:45 ` Brian J. Murrell
2012-02-26 5:50 ` Fahrzin Hemmati
2012-02-26 6:14 ` Brian J. Murrell
2012-02-26 7:19 ` Jérôme Poulin
2012-02-26 19:43 ` Brian J. Murrell
2012-02-26 11:00 ` Hugo Mills
2012-03-02 11:50 ` Brian J. Murrell [this message]
2012-03-02 12:23 ` Fajar A. Nugraha
2012-02-26 19:37 ` Daniel Lee
2012-02-26 19:48 ` Brian J. Murrell
2012-02-26 19:52 ` Daniel Lee
2012-02-26 20:05 ` Brian J. Murrell
2012-02-26 20:25 ` Daniel Lee
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='jiqc6i$e2$1@dough.gmane.org' \
--to=brian@interlinx.bc.ca \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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).