I am awfully sorry for annoying but i just want to understand it right...
is this clearly not possible?!?! i am sure i got this working on my old omv 5
trapexit (author of mergerfs) would have to explain how that works more. I would guess it is trying to keep "SomeFolder" together.
I don't know why it would work on omv 5.x and not 6.x because the mergerfs is exactly the same. The plugin just puts the policy in the options. mergerfs does everything else.
Hello (again 
).
How does mergerfs Interpret "most free space" (or "least used space", etc...).
Does it use percentage (%) or does it interprete the amount (Gigabyte for example) of the disc?
So if I have four discs:
1) 4000GB total
2) 4000GB total
3) 5000GB total
4) 8000GB total
**********
how does mergerfs interpret "least used space" when all of them has a balance of 2000GB used space?
1) 50% (2000GB) used space
2) 50% (2000GB) used space
3) 40% (2000GB) used space
4) 20% (2000GB) used space
So in this case with settings "least used space" mergerfs should write at HDD no. 4 - is this right?
**********
And what is the difference to "most free space" (still all 2000GB used space)
1) 50% (2000GB) free space
2) 50% (2000GB) free space
3) 60% (3000GB) free space
4) 80% (6000GB) free space
In this case mergerfs would also choose HDD no. 4
**********
"least free space" will be the opposite, right?
mergerfs would choose HDD no. 1 or 2
So only question is PERCENTAGE or netto AMOUNT
Thank U 
Have you looked at the mergerfs docs?
Sie haben noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registrieren Sie sich kostenlos und nehmen Sie an unserer Community teil!
