Michael Duell rub.de> writes:
>
> Hallo Lubos!
>
> I have got the same problems with send/receive. Had those problems
> for several weeks or months now. Not sure when those started.
>
> These send/receive problems are known and there are several bug
> reports all over the internet and also
Hello,
I am having strange issue with btrfs send/receive:
#btrfs send -p /mnt/a/_btrbk_snap/debian.20160621_1
/mnt/a/_btrbk_snap/debian.20160622 | btrfs receive
/mnt/ext/backups/vaclfw/
At subvol /mnt/a/_btrbk_snap/debian.20160622
At snapshot debian.20160622
ERROR: unlink
Hello,
I have a (rather historical btrfs) filesystem running here.
When I run scrub, I get a lot of messages like :
btrfs: checksum error at logical 2153033760768 on dev /dev/md2, sector
492918400, root 5232, inode 3360637, offset 217088, length 4096, links 1
(path: )
and
btrfs: unable to
Martin Steigerwald, Sat, 24 Mar 2012 14:10:42 +0100:
Am Samstag, 24. März 2012 schrieb Lubos Kolouch:
Hello,
Hi Lubos,
I have a (rather historical btrfs) filesystem running here.
When I run scrub, I get a lot of messages like :
btrfs: checksum error at logical 2153033760768 on dev /dev
Dmitry Olenin, Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:03:39 +0900:
On 11/09/2011 04:48 PM, Lubos Kolouch wrote:
Sorry for possibly OT question - when I have historical btrfs system
mounted with zlib compression,
can I remount it with lzo ? What will happen? Will the COW be broken
and the files taking
dima, Wed, 09 Nov 2011 10:01:13 +0900:
On 11/09/2011 12:12 AM, Chris Mason wrote:
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 10:01:51AM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 11:00:42AM +0900, dima wrote:
On 11/08/2011 10:54 AM, Eric Griffith wrote:
On 11/7/2011 8:52 PM, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
On
Li Zefan, Tue, 12 Jul 2011 16:44:31 +0800:
I've been monitoring the lists for a while now but didn't see this
problem mentioned in particular: I've got a fairly standard desktop
system at home, 700gb WD drive, nothing special, with 2 btrfs
filesystems and some snapshots. The system runs for
Hello,
I am getting following errors in the syslog
(running 2.6.39-gentoo kernel, latest git btrfs-progs,
mounted with -o space_cache)
btrfs: free space inode generation (0) did not match free space cache
generation (325850) for block group 29360128
btrfs: free space inode generation (0) did
Hello,
I added a new disk into our RAID5 array, it looks like this:
md2 : active raid5 sdd4[3] sde4[4] sda4[0] sdc4[2] sdb4[1]
3767274240 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/5] [U]
# btrfs fi sh
Label: none uuid: 5534d2e7-be31-49c7-8ab7-90c5ab8afe18
Total devices 1 FS
Hello again,
OK I found it (randomly) on the wiki:
btrfs filesystem resize 3:max /home
Seems like btrfs help is not up-to-date and the wiki is...
Thank you again
Lubos
Lubos Kolouch, Wed, 04 May 2011 08:31:30 +:
Hello,
I added a new disk into our RAID5 array, it looks like
Hello,
Say I have a btrfs-formatted disk with many subvolumes/snapshots.
How do I do backup (over network) ?
If I use just rsync, I will get many copies of the files (one for each
snapshot).
So I would need to write a tool that would
- get listing of the subvolumes/snapshots
- somehow figure
Goffredo Baroncelli, Thu, 10 Feb 2011 19:24:57 +0100:
On 02/09/2011 09:12 PM, Lubos Kolouch wrote:
Goffredo Baroncelli, Wed, 09 Feb 2011 19:25:34 +0100:
On 02/08/2011 10:26 PM, Lubos Kolouch wrote:
Goffredo Baroncelli, Tue, 08 Feb 2011 21:00:25 +0100:
On 02/08/2011 07:57 AM, Lubos Kolouch
Goffredo Baroncelli, Tue, 08 Feb 2011 21:00:25 +0100:
On 02/08/2011 07:57 AM, Lubos Kolouch wrote:
Hi,
I'm hitting this issue - sda5 is a normal device, nothing to do with
loop, encryption etc.
# mkfs.btrfs /dev/sda5
WARNING! - Btrfs v0.19-35-g1b444cd-dirty IS EXPERIMENTAL WARNING
Goffredo Baroncelli, Sun, 23 Jan 2011 13:17:13 +0100:
Hi Lubos,
On 01/23/2011 08:17 AM, Lubos Kolouch wrote:
Hello,
During doing backups I found strange behaviour... 2.6.37, latest btrfs-
progs from git
nbgentoo ~ # btrfs subv crea a
Create subvolume './a'
nbgentoo ~ # cd
Hello,
After another power loss (I am fortune, am I not?) I have the following
situation :
Label: none uuid: ac155851-0e31-4aed-9ba4-ee712506368a
Total devices 3 FS bytes used 1.02TB
devid1 size 931.51GB used 70.00GB path /dev/sdd1
devid3 size 1.79TB used
Lubos Kolouch, Wed, 29 Dec 2010 13:50:41 +:
Hello,
After another power loss (I am fortune, am I not?) I have the following
situation :
Label: none uuid: ac155851-0e31-4aed-9ba4-ee712506368a
Total devices 3 FS bytes used 1.02TB
devid1 size 931.51GB used 70.00GB path
Tomasz Chmielewski, Tue, 05 Oct 2010 18:07:58 +0200:
On 05.10.2010 17:33, Phillip Susi wrote:
On 10/5/2010 7:26 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
There is a standard df tool, but it can be a lengthy process for
filesystems with lots of files.
Maybe you mean du? df takes almost no time at all
Sebastian 'gonX' Jensen, Wed, 29 Sep 2010 12:48:56 +0200:
Hey guys,
Today I experienced my first checksum error just out of the blue - and
it's not just the 'csum + 1 = private' issue, it's a completely
different one. Because of this, I am unable to retrieve the data off the
drive, even
Martin Walter, Tue, 28 Sep 2010 11:46:05 +0200:
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:07:02AM +0200, Francis Galiegue wrote:
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 01:00, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
Something like SurveyMonkey (http://www.surveymonkey.com) or
SurveyGizmo
Sebastian 'gonX' Jensen, Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:37:02 +0200:
On 24 September 2010 07:41, Lubos Kolouch lubos.kolo...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
I added disk to raid5 array on one of the backup hosts, running btrfs.
So on /dev/md2 I have plenty of space now.
However when I run
btrfs
Goffredo Baroncelli, Fri, 24 Sep 2010 19:08:50 +0200:
On Friday, 24 September, 2010, Lubos Kolouch wrote:
Sebastian 'gonX' Jensen, Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:37:02 +0200:
On 24 September 2010 07:41, Lubos Kolouch lubos.kolo...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
I added disk to raid5 array on one
Hello,
I added disk to raid5 array on one of the backup hosts, running btrfs.
So on /dev/md2 I have plenty of space now.
However when I run
btrfs filesystem resize max /dev/md2
I get
Resize '/dev/md2' of 'max'
ERROR: unable to resize '/dev/md2'
The same result when I try resize +1g.
Chris Mason, Mon, 20 Sep 2010 08:13:07 -0400:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 12:10:08PM +, Lubos Kolouch wrote:
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 07:30:57 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:00:08AM +, Lubos Kolouch wrote:
No, not stable!
Again, after powerloss, I have *two
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 07:30:57 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:00:08AM +, Lubos Kolouch wrote:
No, not stable!
Again, after powerloss, I have *two* damaged btrfs filesystems.
Please tell me more about your system. I do extensive power fail
testing here without
Lubos Kolouch, Tue, 07 Sep 2010 05:55:12 +:
Hello,
I have on one computer damaged btrfs filesystem... it was a strange
crash, it showed about 30% free space, however then the volume crashed
with 'no space left' messages and after reboot it is unusable.
I can mount it, I can df
Hello,
I have on one computer damaged btrfs filesystem... it was a strange
crash, it showed about 30% free space, however then the volume crashed
with 'no space left' messages and after reboot it is unusable.
I can mount it, I can df it but when I try for example ls,
ls gets stuck (does not
Johannes Hirte, Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:38:30 +0200:
On Thursday 26 August 2010 15:39:25 Andreas Philipp wrote:
On 26.08.2010 15:27, Johannes Hirte wrote:
Looks like another manifestation of the csum bug. Are you able to
read all files from the affected volume? Did you tried a balance with
an
Lubos
Lubos Kolouch, Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:09:59 +:
correction - btrfs-cache processes
Lubos Kolouch, Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:02:18 +:
With 2.6.34 it basically works, but time to time the load goes up to
50 and lot of btrfs-cleaner processess are spawned... the system is
responsive
Yes, I pulled today's btrfs-progs.
Lubos
On Pá, čec 30, 2010, 13:03:10, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:
Have you updated with latest btrfs-tools?
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 6:31 AM, Lubos Kolouch lubos.kolo...@gmail.comwrote:
Hello,
kerner 2.6.35-rc6
btrfs filesystem df /home
Data
PM, Leonidas Spyropoulos
artafi...@gmail.com wrote:
I use the latest btrfs-tools and 2.6.34-020634-generic kernel for
lucid. Got no issues like that, is it happening with 2.6.34 kernel as
well?
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Lubos Kolouch
lubos.kolo...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, I pulled
correction - btrfs-cache processes
Lubos Kolouch, Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:02:18 +:
With 2.6.34 it basically works, but time to time the load goes up to
50 and lot of btrfs-cleaner processess are spawned... the system is
responsive though, except for the filesystem... after an hour or so
Hello,
kerner 2.6.35-rc6
btrfs filesystem df /home
Data: total=1.68TB, used=987.62GB
Metadata: total=56.01GB, used=48.16GB
System: total=12.00MB, used=200.00KB
touch: cannot touch `/home/x': No space left on device
Any ideas what I should do?
Thank you
Lubos
--
To unsubscribe from this
Hello,
I added another device to the / filesystem
(btrfs device add).
Now I can't boot off it, even though kernel sees both devices
(sda2, sdb2).
Am I screwed or is there any way how to convince the kernel
to assemble the / filesystem?
Thank you
Lubos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send
Oystein Viggen, Fri, 02 Jul 2010 08:15:03 +0200:
For btrfs with lots of snapshots, I believe btrfs device add of the
new device followed by btrfs device remove of the old one would be the
most convenient.
Øystein
This solution if very elegant and cool - if you can put the discs into one
Daniel J Blueman, Thu, 01 Jul 2010 12:26:10 +0100:
What is the correct way to do this?
The only way to do this preserving duplication is to use hardlinks
between duplicated files (which reference counts the inode), and use
'rsync -H'.
Dan
But when the files are on different snaphots,
35 matches
Mail list logo
