On 2012-10-28 11:33, Martin Steigerwald wrote:

Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:

[...]

quoted

$ sudo ./btrfs fi df /mnt/btrfs1/
Path: /mnt/btrfs1
Summary:
  Disk_size:		  21.00GB
  Disk_allocated:	   1.83GB
  Disk_unallocated:	  19.17GB
  Used:			 284.00KB
  Free_(Estimated):	  15.76GB	(Max: 20.54GB, min: 10.96GB)
  Data_to_disk_ratio:	     75 %

Okay, so that btrfs fi df.

Which is a summary.

I think much more wouldn´t be a summary anymore, so thats okay.


And the following

quoted

Allocated_area:
  Data,Single: Size:8.00MB, Used:0.00
     /dev/vdb	    8.00MB

  Data,RAID0: Size:921.75MB, Used:256.00KB
     /dev/vdb	  307.25MB

[...]

is detail shown by btrfs filesystem disk-usage?

Yes

While

quoted

Disks:
  /dev/vdb	    3.00GB
     Data,Single:              8.00MB
     Data,RAID0:             307.25MB
     Metadata,Single:          8.00MB
     Metadata,RAID1:         460.94MB

[...]

will be btrfs device disk-usage?

yes

What was your reasoning for not using options to btrfs filesystem df? That 
df doesn´t show more than "disk free" as well?

My feel is that a switch should change "a bit" a command. In this case
there are very different outputs, for different purposes (how is used a
disk ? where are the chunks ? how many free space I have ? ).

Then there is a little "inconsistency": "df" versus "disk-usage". I would 
use either "disk-free" and "disk-usage" or "df" and "du". While regular 
"du" is not disk-usage but a filesystem directory tree usage command.

I will think about this a bit more.

Thanks,

-- 
gpg @keyserver.linux.it: Goffredo Baroncelli (kreijackATinwind.it>
Key fingerprint BBF5 1610 0B64 DAC6 5F7D  17B2 0EDA 9B37 8B82 E0B5