Yes it's an ancient 32 bit machine. There must be a complex bug involved as the system, when originally mounted, claimed the correct free space and only as used over time did the discrepancy between used and free grow. I'm afraid I chose btrfs because it appeared capable of breaking the 16 tera limit on a 32 bit system. If this isn't the case then it's incredible that I've been using this file system for about a year without difficulty until now. -Justin Sent from my iPad > On Feb 27, 2014, at 1:51 PM, Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> On Feb 27, 2014, at 12:27 PM, Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> This is on i686? >> >> The kernel page cache is limited to 16TB on i686, so effectively your block device is limited to 16TB. While the file system successfully creates, I think it's a bug that the mount -t btrfs command is probably a btrfs bug. > > Yes Chris, circular logic day. It's probably a btrfs bug that the mount command succeeds. > > So let us know if this is i686 or x86_64, because if it's the former it's a bug that should get fixed. > > > Chris Murphy > > -- > 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 -- 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
