On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 15:05:56 +0200, Xavier Nicollet <nicollet@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Le 02 août 2010 à 14:40, Sami Liedes a écrit: >> [BTRFS supports only 256 hard-links per directory ...] but if it >> indeed needs a disk format change, I think this should be considered >> before the format is set in stone. I won't personally lose my sleep if >> this is not fixed - I can use other filesystems for backuppc and other >> similar systems, > > Wouldn't it be even better to actually patch BackupPC to handle btrfs > snapshots and COW (bcp) ? That's not the only application impacted by this. Also, I think it's unrealistic to expect everyone else to code to BTRFS-specific ioctls when there's other filesystems and other platforms to worry about. It would also be nice if we could tar/rsync/whatever between BTRFS and something else like ext3 or some other OS entirely, without archiving tools either blowing up or requiring application-specific knowledge of how to convert dedups to hard links and back. Also, I believe it's not strictly 256 links, it's dependent on the length of the names. I recall Chris posting something about being able to fix this without a format change, though it wasn't a priority yet. -Anthony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
