Btrfs: broken by design?

Posted Jun 27, 2010 21:48 UTC (Sun) by dark (guest, #8483)
In reply to: Btrfs: broken by design? by nix
Parent article: Btrfs: broken by design?

Hmm, where are you getting the 40% number? Is that real metadata, or are the inline extents also counted as metadata because they are stored in leaf nodes?

Btrfs: broken by design?

Posted Jun 27, 2010 22:02 UTC (Sun) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (2 responses)

in the mail thread the btrfs author stated this figure (20% in metadata that is then replicated)

Btrfs: broken by design?

Posted Jun 27, 2010 23:02 UTC (Sun) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

I think it might even have been higher than that, 46% or something, but I could remember it was above 40%.

Btrfs: broken by design?

Posted Jun 29, 2010 20:26 UTC (Tue) by masoncl (subscriber, #47138) [Link]

Everything being stored is in metadata blocks (the btree) but this does include the actual file data. The test chose file sizes that btrfs would pack into the btree.