@magicalyak Hello again. I’m a little concerned that if we ‘over do’ the separation it’s get to be overly complicated to setup. As you already have it seems to be a nice split. ie special location for db (as we discussed when you first did the 1.29 Rock-on), because btrfs+db can require special attention, and then another for all the data and config. If the new v1.30 ZM Rock-on mirrors this then we have a communication issue not a technical one.
Also we have the existing User Docs of ZoneMinder Rock-on and if the 2 versions of zm differ re share allocation then we are making our own monster and adding to potential confusion. Especially given you left open the possibility to add additional shares if need be, hence allowing for more advanced configurations if need be.
@glenngould Are you saying that you have no file entries appearing where you might of otherwise found them with @magicalyak 's v1.29 zoneminder Rock-on? Or is this related to your size reporting issue?
Which may just be a current artefact of Raid5/6 use (apologies but yet to investigate further).
Apologies if I’m jumping in here inappropriately.