On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 13:02:32 +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> On 2012-11-02 12:18, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
>> Metadata, DUP is displayed as 3,50GB on the device level and as 1,75GB
>> in total. I understand the logic behind this, but this could be a bit
>> confusing.
>>
>> But it makes sense: Showing real allocation on device level makes
>> sense,
>> cause thats what really allocated on disk. Total makes some sense,
>> cause thats what is being used from the tree by BTRFS.
>
> Yes, me too. At the first I was confused when you noticed this
> discrepancy. So I have to admit that it is not so obvious to understand.
> However we didn't find any way to make it more clear...
>
>> It still looks confusing at first…
> We could use "Chunk(s) capacity" instead of total/size ? I would like an
> opinion from a "english people" point of view..
This is easy to fix, here's a mockup:
Metadata,DUP: Size: 1.75GB ×2, Used: 627.84MB ×2
/dev/dm-0 3.50GB
Data Metadata Metadata System System
Single Single DUP Single DUP Unallocated
/dev/dm-16 1.31TB 8.00MB 56.00GB 4.00MB 16.00MB 0.00
====== ======== =========== ====== =========== ===========
Total 1.31TB 8.00MB 28.00GB ×2 4.00MB 8.00MB ×2 0.00
Used 1.31TB 0.00 5.65GB ×2 0.00 152.00KB ×2
Also, I don't know if you could use libblkid, but it finds more
descriptive names than dm-NN (thanks to some smart sorting logic).
--
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
