View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
musv Advocate
Joined: 01 Dec 2002 Posts: 3333 Location: de
|
Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 8:17 am Post subject: BTRFS copy on SSD with lzo: no space left on device |
|
|
Good morning there.
It's no question, just an interesting experience I've made yesterday.
I 've got a new SSD and wanted to copy the data of the old SSD to the new one.
I'm using now BTRFS for more than 1 year as a kind of Reiser4 successor. The interesting feature of BTRFS for me is the lzo compression.
I created the partitions on the new SSD and mounted that thing with:
Code: | mount /dev/sda2 /mnt/ssd -o noatime,nodiratime,ssd,discard,noacl,compress-force=lzo |
Then I tried to copy:
IOTop showed me a IO speed of about 250 mb/sec, which is ok, because my computer supports only SATA-II. But when cp came to the big files (more than 4 GB), it stopped with an error message:
Code: | failed to copy file xyz: no space left on device |
Of course, the remaining space was more than enough. So I got to the idea to use rsync instead of cp. rsync gave me some more information, but failed with the same error. No space left on device.
It's describe quite good in this bug report. A workaround that worked for me was also described there:
Code: | rsync -a --bwlimit=10000 * /mnt/ssd |
That did the job. Ok, it's not an option for eternity to limit the IO speed to 10 mb/sec, but at least I got the huge files copied. It's annoying and shouldn't happen. The bug report was opened half year ago. I hope, they'll fix it instead of include more features into btrfs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Simba7 l33t
Joined: 22 Jan 2007 Posts: 706 Location: Billings, MT, USA
|
Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
More than that. I remember having these issues several YEARS ago.
One reason I switched to EXT4, and will switch to ZFS (which is nice) eventually. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
krinn Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003 Posts: 7470
|
Posted: Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Everyone knows how brtfs will end...
It have flaw in design, and i think will always have problem with disk space.
If they finally manage to fix the disk space problem in brtfs, it will be done at the cost of hacks to fix that, ending as fs that is poorer than other ones.
I don't mean to offend brtfs lovers, but yes, brtfs is just a dead end.
Maybe some other fs could be built with brtfs good ideas in mind, but with a valid design |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|