On 21/03/14 02:21, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 07:58:06PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
In a normal scenario when sys-admin replaces a disk, the
expeted is btrfs will release the disk completely.
However the below test case gives a wrong impression that
replaced disk is still is
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
In a normal scenario when sys-admin replaces a disk, the
expectation is that btrfs will release the disk completely.
However the below test case gives a wrong impression that
replaced disk is still is in use.
$ btrfs rep start /dev/sde /dev/sdg4 /btrfs
$
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
generally if you use
echo test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
it would introduce return char at the end and it can not
be part of the label. The correct command is
echo -n test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
This patch will check for this user error
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
I have an opinion that system logs /var/log/messages are
valuable info to investigate the real system issues at
the data center. People handling data center issues
do spend a lot time and efforts analyzing messages
files. Having usage error logged into
On 20/05/14 01:16, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 5/19/14, 12:04 PM, Anand Jain wrote:
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
generally if you use
echo test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
it would introduce return char at the end and it can not
be part of the label. The correct command is
echo -n
On 20/05/14 01:19, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Tue, 20 May 2014 01:04:30 +0800
Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com wrote:
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
generally if you use
echo test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
it would introduce return char at the end and it can not
be part of the
When using parse_size(), even non-numeric value is passed, it will only
give error message ERROR: size value is empty, which is quite
confusing for end users.
This patch will introduce more meaningful error message for the
following new cases
1) Invalid size string (non-numeric string)
2) Minus
progs # cat btrfs_mini_tst.c
/*
* gcc -o btrfs_mini_tst btrfs_mini_tst.c -lbtrfs
*/
char btrfs_read_and_process_send_stream ();
int
main ()
{
return btrfs_read_and_process_send_stream ();
}
progs # gcc -o btrfs_mini_tst btrfs_mini_tst.c -lbtrfs
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 06:15:49PM +0800, Dennis Lan (dlan) wrote:
progs # cat btrfs_mini_tst.c
/*
* gcc -o btrfs_mini_tst btrfs_mini_tst.c -lbtrfs
*/
char btrfs_read_and_process_send_stream ();
int
main ()
{
return btrfs_read_and_process_send_stream ();
}
progs # gcc -o
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Arvin Schnell aschn...@suse.de wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 06:15:49PM +0800, Dennis Lan (dlan) wrote:
progs # cat btrfs_mini_tst.c
/*
* gcc -o btrfs_mini_tst btrfs_mini_tst.c -lbtrfs
*/
char btrfs_read_and_process_send_stream ();
int
main ()
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 08:34:19AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Proposed changes:
- format all subcommands as bold instead of italic ('' - **)
- add all missing ...
- find a way how to add '...' around ... (xsl or sed or whatever)
Does that work for you?
That is OK for me, I'll investigate it.
On 20 May 2014 06:07, Konstantinos Skarlatos k.skarla...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19/5/2014 8:38 μμ, Mark Fasheh wrote:
Well, after having good results with duperemove with a few gigs of data, i
tried it on a 500gb subvolume. After it scanned all files, it is stuck at
100% of one cpu core for
Memory leaks are bad mmkay?
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fb.com
---
fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
index 73f706c..cf5aead 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
@@ -2478,6 +2478,7 @@ static void
On my box, the used value in the output of btrfs filesystem df is not
updated in a timely manner, after that one or more subvolumes have been
deleted. I need to execute btrfs filesystem sync, in order to update the
value. Could someone fix this, please? I suspect the cause is that subvolumes
On my box, the used value in the output of btrfs filesystem df is not
updated in a timely manner, after that one or more subvolumes have been
deleted. I need to execute btrfs filesystem sync, in order to update the
value.
How do I fix this? Or, could someone fix this in btrfs-progs, please?
On 2014-05-19 22:07, Russell Coker wrote:
On Mon, 19 May 2014 23:47:37 Brendan Hide wrote:
This is extremely difficult to measure objectively. Subjectively ... see
below.
[snip]
*What other failure modes* should we guard against?
I know I'd sleep a /little/ better at night knowing that a
On Tue, 20 May 2014 14:50:10 Astro Xe wrote:
On my box, the used value in the output of btrfs filesystem df is not
updated in a timely manner, after that one or more subvolumes have been
deleted. I need to execute btrfs filesystem sync, in order to update the
value.
How do I fix this? Or,
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 02:50:10PM +0100, Astro Xe wrote:
On my box, the used value in the output of btrfs filesystem df is not
updated in a timely manner, after that one or more subvolumes have been
deleted. I need to execute btrfs filesystem sync, in order to update the
value.
How do
As Marc Merlin recently wrote in his blog [1] scrub can sometimes leave a
stale state file behind, making cancel/resume complain. I took a peek at
the code and found most of the scrub state file handling fairly
straightforward, so before I go off and start hacking, what would a
better
The failed csum messages generated by btrfs mention the inode number,
but on filesystems with multiple subvolumes, that's not enough to
identify the file. I've added the inode number to the messages so
that they're more complete.
I also noticed that the extent/offset information printed for the
On 5/20/14, 1:36 AM, Anand Jain wrote:
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
generally if you use
echo test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
it would introduce return char at the end and it can not
be part of the label. The correct command is
echo -n test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
This
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 02:36:48PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
generally if you use
echo test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
it would introduce return char at the end and it can not
be part of the label. The correct command is
echo -n test
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 02:38:11PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
I have an opinion that system logs /var/log/messages are
valuable info to investigate the real system issues at
the data center. People handling data center issues
do spend a lot time and
On 5/20/14, 11:33 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 02:36:48PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
generally if you use
echo test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
it would introduce return char at the end and it can not
be part of the label. The correct
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 09:48:17PM +0200, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Over the weekend I tried to copy one external usb drive (on ext4) to
another one formatted with btrfs.
Now I came back, and 48h later only ~300GB were copied and I found
messages like the following on syslog:
That's about 1
On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 14:46 +0100, Astro Xe wrote:
On my box, the used value in the output of btrfs filesystem df is
not updated in a timely manner, after that one or more subvolumes have
been deleted. I need to execute btrfs filesystem sync, in order to
update the value. Could someone fix
Should the initrd/initramfs no longer include btrfsck, and instead include
btrfs and fsck.btrfs?
In btrfs-progs 3.14 there is now a 1K /sbin/fsck.btrfs placeholder file.
btrfs and btrfsck files are the same binary, the difference is btrfsck only can
do check/repair. Including btrfs instead
Hi Linus
Please pull my for-linus branch:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git for-linus
It has two fixes that we've been testing for 3.16, but since both are safe
and fix real bugs, it makes sense to send for 3.15 instead
Liu Bo (1) commits (+5/-1):
Btrfs:
On 2014/05/20 04:07 PM, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
On 2014-05-19 22:07, Russell Coker wrote:
[snip]
As an aside, I'd really like to be able to set RAID levels by subtree. I'd
like to use RAID-1 with ditto blocks for my important data and RAID-0 for
unimportant data.
But the proposed changes
On 05/19/2014 02:54 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Summary:
It's insufficient to pass rootflags=degraded to get the system root
to mount when a device is missing. It looks like when a device is
missing, udev doesn't create the dev-disk-by-uuid linkage that then
causes systemd to change the device
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 12:00:24AM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 05/19/2014 02:54 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Summary:
It's insufficient to pass rootflags=degraded to get the system root
to mount when a device is missing. It looks like when a device is
missing, udev doesn't create
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 01:07:50AM +0300, Konstantinos Skarlatos wrote:
Duperemove will be shipping as supported software in a major SUSE release so
it will be bug fixed, etc as you would expect. At the moment I'm very busy
trying to fix qgroup bugs so I haven't had much time to add features,
On 21/5/2014 1:37 πμ, Mark Fasheh wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 01:07:50AM +0300, Konstantinos Skarlatos wrote:
Duperemove will be shipping as supported software in a major SUSE release so
it will be bug fixed, etc as you would expect. At the moment I'm very busy
trying to fix qgroup bugs so I
Chris Murphy posted on Tue, 20 May 2014 10:56:26 -0600 as excerpted:
Should the initrd/initramfs no longer include btrfsck, and instead
include btrfs and fsck.btrfs?
btrfs (the program) should be included in any case as btrfs device scan
should be run (normally triggered via udev rules when a
Alexandre Oliva posted on Tue, 20 May 2014 12:37:07 -0300 as excerpted:
The failed csum messages generated by btrfs mention the inode number,
but on filesystems with multiple subvolumes, that's not enough to
identify the file. I've added the inode number to the messages
?? s/added the inode
On 05/14/2014 05:01 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
It turns out that the primary 64K Boot Area A is too small for some
applications and/or some architectures.
When I discussed this with Chris Mason, he pointed out that the area
beyond the superblock is also unused, up until at least the megabyte
On 05/20/2014 07:29 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 05/14/2014 05:01 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
It turns out that the primary 64K Boot Area A is too small for some
applications and/or some architectures.
When I discussed this with Chris Mason, he pointed out that the area
beyond the superblock
On 05/20/2014 04:37 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
On 05/20/2014 07:29 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 05/14/2014 05:01 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
It turns out that the primary 64K Boot Area A is too small for some
applications and/or some architectures.
When I discussed this with Chris Mason, he
Hugo Mills posted on Tue, 20 May 2014 23:26:09 +0100 as excerpted:
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 12:00:24AM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 05/19/2014 02:54 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
It's insufficient to pass rootflags=degraded to get the system root
to mount when a device is missing. It looks
On 05/20/2014 04:37 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
Hi Peter,
We do leave the first 1MB of each device alone. Can we do 256K-1024K
for the boot loader? We don't have an immediate need for the extra
space, but I'd like to reserve a little more than the extra 64KB.
Incidentally, the current
On May 20, 2014, at 5:02 PM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Chris Murphy posted on Tue, 20 May 2014 10:56:26 -0600 as excerpted:
Should the initrd/initramfs no longer include btrfsck, and instead
include btrfs and fsck.btrfs?
btrfs (the program) should be included in any case as
On May 20, 2014, at 6:03 PM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
I'd actually argue that's functioning as it should, since I see forced
manual intervention in ordered to mount degraded as a FEATURE, NOT A BUG.
Manual intervention is OK for now, when it takes the form of dropping to a
On May 20, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Konstantinos Skarlatos k.skarla...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 21/5/2014 1:37 πμ, Mark Fasheh wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 01:07:50AM +0300, Konstantinos Skarlatos wrote:
Duperemove will be shipping as supported software in a major SUSE release
so
it will be bug
On Tue, 20 May 2014 07:56:41 ashf...@whisperpc.com wrote:
1. There will be more disk space used by the metadata. I've been aware
of space allocation issues in BTRFS for more than three years. If the use
of ditto blocks will make this issue worse, then it's probably not a good
idea to
I'm sorry to bother your but it has been about 2 weeks after your last
reply.
Is there any problem?
Thanks,
Qu
Original Message
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] btrfs: Add missing device check in
dev_info/rm_dev ioctl
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
To: Qu Wenruo
Hi Qu,
in-line below..
On 06/05/14 14:33, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Follow the kernel header changes to add new member of
btrfs_ioctl_dev_info_args.
This change will use special bit to keep backward compatibility, so even
on old kernels this will not screw anything up.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo
Hi Qu,
First of all. With this patch, we don't need the old btrfs-progs
workaround fix [1] anymore. David should back-out if you are ok.
[1]
commit 206efb60cbe3049e0d44c6da3c1909aeee18f813
Author: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
Date: Fri Feb 7 15:07:19 2014 +0800
btrfs-progs:
Hi Qu,
Either we need to determine missing disk when disk disappear
or when we hit by -ENODEV during IO.
Discovering the same at the time when user run
'btrfs fi show' or 'btrfs dev del', is just not correct.
You might use interface as proposed here.
[PATCH RFC] btrfs: revamp
Hi Qu,
Thanks for checking with me. sorry for the delay. The
preliminary RFC patch which was sent and mentioned in
the other emails took time more than expected.
Further on top of your check_missing patch I am writing
code to to handle disk reappear. I should be sending them
all soon.
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 06:01:25PM +0200, Brendan Hide wrote:
On 19/05/14 15:00, Scott Middleton wrote:
On 19 May 2014 09:07, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:36:03PM +0800, Scott Middleton wrote:
I read so much about BtrFS that I mistaked Bedup with Duperemove.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] btrfs: Add missing device check in
dev_info/rm_dev ioctl
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
To: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
Date: 2014年05月21日 11:54
Hi Qu,
Thanks for checking with me. sorry for the delay. The
51 matches
Mail list logo
