Am Dienstag, 26. Februar 2013 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Am Dienstag, 26. Februar 2013 schrieb Gareth Pye: > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Martin Steigerwald > > > > <Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I´d still like that for df, whose output is quite bogus in certain > > > BTRFS setups at the moment and does not give applications a realistic > > > estimate at all. One example is raid 1 with 10 GB each disk. Shows 20 > > > GB free. An application which wants to write 15 GB will fail. Which > > > can break installer scripts, package management, cache software or > > > anything else which checks for free space. Thus I´d like df to > > > default to *minimum* free. > > > > Is that any better than the script failing to attempt to install > > because it needs 15G but because some of the storage is used in RAID1 > > then df shows 10G free but the 15G install would work fine. If you > > could force the tool to install where it know it doesn't have > > sufficient space? > > I do not quite understand your question. In RAID-1 with 10 GB and two > disks, df will show 20 GB free. If the script needs 15 GB and checks for > it it would run, but then fail. I would prefer that the script space > check bails out in that case it is know that there is not enough space > available anymore. Well, okay, and exactly that is not known, cause if the files the installer script are installed are stored a single instead of RAID-1 there would be enough space. Anyway for the additions Goffredo made I strongly suggest reading the old discussions before starting to discuss stuff that has already been discussed back then. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- 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
