On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 16:51:44 Qu Wenruo wrote: > In fact such "defeat"(or whatever) is not really btrfs only problem. > In ext*, there is still similiar behavior: ext* has a up limit on the > number of inode after mkfs. > (When you mkfs.ext*, you are prompt the up limit of inodes) > However other metadata in ext* is stored together with data, so no > ENOSPC problem like btrfs. There is a huge difference between BTRFS and Ext* in this regard. The way that Ext* has always worked is that if you delete one file, pipe or socket that isn't hard-linked, or one sym-link or directory then you free up 1 Inode. 1 free Inode allows you to create 1 file, pipe, socket, sym-link, or directory. Deleting a file or directory on BTRFS takes MORE metadata space (at least temporarily) because it writes a new copy of the tree. So not only will deleting files not immediately solve a lack of metadata space on BTRFS but it might even make things worse. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ -- 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
