You can try "-l" option of mkfs.btrfs to have all the small files packed in the metadata, not extents. GThomas 2010/9/9 Marcel Lohmann <marcel.lohmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > 2010/9/9 Zhu Yanhai <zhu.yanhai@xxxxxxxxx>: >> 2010/9/9 Marcel Lohmann <marcel.lohmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >>> 2010/9/8 Zhu Yanhai <zhu.yanhai@xxxxxxxxx>: >>> But if it is neccessary to "drop" that duplicate metadata, how can I >>> arrange this afterwards. And if it is done, then I would have reduced >>> the Metadata size, but will there really be more space for Data? Where >>> is the remaining space from 77 GB to 130 GB? >> >> 53 * 2 + 24 = 130. The size of Metadata reported by "btrfs filesystem df" >> is 53GB, however it occupies 53 * 2 = 106GB on 'disk' physically. >> So yes, there will be more space for Data. >> > > Perfect, great. This sounds strange on the first sight because it does > not show anywhere that one has to double the metadata. Or better: that > it is currently doubled. > So I know what I have to do now. I will drop the partition and create it again. > There is then still the problem that I have twice the size of metadata > than real data. But I guess that is due to the high number of very > small files (current estimate is 1440*50000 files with around 200Bytes > to 2000Bytes). On the other hand there is only twice the size reserved > and actually used a bit more that the real data. > > Many thanks for make that clear to me. > > Marcel > -- > 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 > -- 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
