2013/10/28 Hugo Mills <hugo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 04:09:18AM +0800, Lester B wrote: >> The btrfs setup only have one device of size 7 GiB but >> when I run df, the total size shown is 15 GiB. Running >> btrfs --repair > > I'd recommend not running btrfs check --repair unless you really > know what you're doing, or you've checked with someone knowledgable > and they say you should try it. On a non-broken filesystem (as here), > it's probably OK, though. > >> displays an error "cache and super >> generation don't match, space cache will be invalidated." > > This is harmless. > >> How can I correct the total fs size as shown in df? > > You can't. It's an artefact of the fact that you've got a RAID-1 > (or RAID-10, or --mixed and DUP) filesystem, and that the standard > kernel interface for df doesn't allow us to report the correct figures > -- see [1] (and the subsequent entry as well) for a more detailed > description. > > Hugo. > > [1] https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ#Why_does_df_show_incorrect_free_space_for_my_RAID_volume.3F > > -- > === Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk === > PGP key: 65E74AC0 from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk > --- Nothing right in my left brain. Nothing left in --- > my right brain. But my setup is a simple one without any RAID levels or other things so at least df size column should show the actual size of my setup. -- 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
