Hi Goffredo, thank you very much for your work on making the btrfs filesystem df output that much more understandable. It is a real improvement already. I would however like to bring this comment from Hugo to your attention once again: On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Hugo Mills <hugo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> $ ./btrfs filesystem df / >> Path: / >> Summary: >> Disk_size: 72.57GB > > Also, use kB, MB, GB, TB for powers-of-ten based units, and KiB, > MiB, GiB, TiB for powers-of-two based units, please. I don't care > which you report in, but please do make the distinction. (And note > that it's kB with a lower case k, but KiB with an upper case K). This > brings us in line with the relevant ISO and IEEE standards. I strongly support this suggestion. With terabyte-disks being the norm and the difference between TB and TiB being 10%, we really can't afford ignoring the difference any longer. Contrary to Hugo, I also have a strong preference to change the calculations to use powers-of-ten. There is nothing binary about disk space; it's just a function of how many bits they reliably manage to cram onto a platter. And while the raw size of an SSD does tend to be binary, after reservation of the garbage-collection/spare area the effective size is also completely arbitrary. Any reference to powers-of-two is completely artificial in these areas. But if you don't want to change the calculation, please do change the units as Hugo requested. Kind regards, Bart Noordervliet -- 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
