> > Note that you really want to be running the latest kernel possible if > using btrfs; since 2.6.39 there have been several major performance > fixes, stability fixes, crash-corruption fixes, which users did hit on > a somewhat regular basis. Btrfs is not yet stable for the typical > user who just wants things to work, even when things don't. I don't > know of any major distros that offer support services for btrfs > filesystems, for instance. I'm not planning to run my whole system on btrfs just yet - but I was keen to start running one or two test filesystems on a server that I currently have running Debian squeeze. Everything else on the server has to remain as-is if possible. Thanks for the feedback - I will start looking into the newer kernels and see if I can use one of them with squeeze, or maybe I will just set up a VM for btrfs One thing I've already noticed in 2.6.39 (and both versions of the tools) is that df results are misleading. E.g. if I run regular df (not btrfs fi df), I am seeing the same amount of available space for all filesystems. Is there currently a way to see space used by each subvolume and snapshot and which kernel and tools versions might be needed? -- 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
