On 02.01.2012 16:01, Daniel Pocock wrote:
One thing I've already noticed in 2.6.39 (and both versions of the
tools) is that df results are misleading. E.g. if I run regular df (not
btrfs fi df), I am seeing the same amount of available space for all
filesystems. Is there currently a way to
These are the btrfs-tools versions on Debian:
squeeze:
kernel: 2.6.32
tools: 0.19+20100601-3
squeeze-backports:
kernel: 2.6.39
tools: nothing (so user ends up with 0.19+20100601-3)
wheezy/testing/sid:
kernel: 3.1.6-1
tools: 0.19+2005-2
Using the 2.6.39 kernel from squeeze-backports, do I
On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 03:29:49PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
These are the btrfs-tools versions on Debian:
squeeze:
kernel: 2.6.32
tools: 0.19+20100601-3
squeeze-backports:
kernel: 2.6.39
tools: nothing (so user ends up with 0.19+20100601-3)
wheezy/testing/sid:
kernel: 3.1.6-1
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Daniel Pocock dan...@pocock.com.au wrote:
These are the btrfs-tools versions on Debian:
squeeze:
kernel: 2.6.32
tools: 0.19+20100601-3
squeeze-backports:
kernel: 2.6.39
tools: nothing (so user ends up with 0.19+20100601-3)
wheezy/testing/sid:
kernel:
Note that you really want to be running the latest kernel possible if
using btrfs; since 2.6.39 there have been several major performance
fixes, stability fixes, crash-corruption fixes, which users did hit on
a somewhat regular basis. Btrfs is not yet stable for the typical
user who just
On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 04:01:48PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
One thing I've already noticed in 2.6.39 (and both versions of the
tools) is that df results are misleading. E.g. if I run regular df (not
btrfs fi df), I am seeing the same amount of available space for all
filesystems. Is there
