On 2020/2/5 上午2:20, Josef Bacik wrote: > On 2/3/20 7:37 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> Hi David, >> >> This is the reminder of how we could handle the behavior change of >> staled qgroup auto removal. >> >> [PROBLEM] >> If btrfs has dropped one subvolume, it will not delete the level 0 >> qgroup automatically, leaving the qgroup still hanging there, with all >> numbers set to 0. >> This needs manual user interaction to delete all those staled qgroups. >> >> [SOLUTIONS] >> There are several way to solve it, all with its advantage and >> disadvantage. >> >> - Auto remove them by default, and no way to keep the the staled qgroups >> Pro: Easy to implement (already submitted) >> Con: User has no choice to keep staled qgroups. But I could argue that >> no one sane would want to keep them anyway. > > This should have been what was done in the first place. Nobody is using > qgroups right now anyway as they do not work, might as well do it the > correct way now so when they are in use we don't have to worry about > it. Thanks, > > Josef David, what's your idea? Still want to push the enable ioctl way? Thanks, Qu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
