On 02/23/2011 03:33 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> I'm actually not that worried about corruption as that is something that
> can be fixed once discovered. What creeps me out about btrfs at the moment
> is this:
> The fact that the FS needs manual rebalance operations and that these can
> "take a while" (even tough this can be done online) doesn't exactly
> btrfs the ideal candidate for an end-user desktop system that should pretty
> much be able to look after itself.
> I'm actually quite interested in btrfs especially for servers because of
> it's features but this problem really worries me.
Yes this is one of the more complicated areas of BTRFS and tends to
blow up in our faces a lot. That being said it's only a big deal if
you tend to run your filesystem close to full a lot, which most people
do not. It is an area that we work very hard to make sure it's not a
problem, hopefully we have eliminated all of the big problems and you
should really only see ENOSPC when you actually fill up the disk.
I'm pretty sure for novice end user desktops the same procedure that
would clean up old snapshot on regular intervals could make rebalance
operation run at the same time since it can be done online...