On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 05:57:10PM -0400, Remi Gauvin wrote:
> On 2018-10-29 02:11 PM, Ulli Horlacher wrote:
> > I want to know how many free space is left and have problems in
> > interpreting the output of:
> >
> > btrfs filesystem usage
> > btrfs filesystem df
> > btrfs filesystem show
> >
>
On 2018-10-29 02:11 PM, Ulli Horlacher wrote:
> I want to know how many free space is left and have problems in
> interpreting the output of:
>
> btrfs filesystem usage
> btrfs filesystem df
> btrfs filesystem show
>
>
In my not so humble opinion, the filesystem usage command has the
easiest
I want to know how many free space is left and have problems in
interpreting the output of:
btrfs filesystem usage
btrfs filesystem df
btrfs filesystem show
In detail:
root@diaspora:~# btrfs filesystem usage /local
Overall:
Device size: 883.51GiB
Device allocated:
On 29.10.18 г. 14:21 ч., Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 29.10.18 г. 9:51 ч., Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 29.10.18 г. 7:53 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>> [snip]
> The cause sounds valid, however would you please explain more about how
> such cleaning on unrelated delalloc range
On 29.10.18 г. 9:51 ч., Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 29.10.18 г. 7:53 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> [snip]
The cause sounds valid, however would you please explain more about how
such cleaning on unrelated delalloc range happens?
>>>
>>> So in my case the following happened - 2 block
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 6:35 AM Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
> For latest kernel, there is a chance that btrfs/057 reports false
> errors.
>
> The false error would look like:
> btrfs/057 4s ... - output mismatch (see
> /home/adam/xfstests-dev/results//btrfs/057.out.bad)
> --- tests/btrfs/057.out
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 11:33 AM Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2018/10/29 下午5:52, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 6:31 AM Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >>
> >> For latest kernel, there is a chance that btrfs/057 reports false
> >> errors.
> >
> > By latest kernel you mean 4.20?
>
> I mean
On 2018/10/29 下午5:52, Filipe Manana wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 6:31 AM Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>
>> For latest kernel, there is a chance that btrfs/057 reports false
>> errors.
>
> By latest kernel you mean 4.20?
I mean almost all kernels.
>
>>
>> The false error would look like:
>>
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 6:31 AM Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
> For latest kernel, there is a chance that btrfs/057 reports false
> errors.
By latest kernel you mean 4.20?
>
> The false error would look like:
> btrfs/057 4s ... - output mismatch (see
>
From: Filipe Manana
Unless the '-s' option is passed to fssum, it should not detect file holes
and have their existence influence the computed checksum for a file. This
tool was added to test btrfs' send/receive feature, so that it checks for
any metadata and data differences between the
From: Filipe Manana
Recently we got a massive simplification for fsync, where for the fast
path we no longer log new extents while their respective ordered extents
are still running.
However that simplification introduced a subtle regression for the case
where we use a ranged fsync (msync).
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 7:20 AM Dave wrote:
>
> This is one I have not seen before.
>
> When running a simple, well-tested and well-used script that makes
> backups using btrfs send | receive, I got these two errors:
>
> At subvol snapshot
> ERROR: rename o131621-1091-0 ->
>
On 29.10.18 г. 7:53 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote:
> [snip]
>>> The cause sounds valid, however would you please explain more about how
>>> such cleaning on unrelated delalloc range happens?
>>
>> So in my case the following happened - 2 block groups were created as
>> delalloc ranges in the - 0-1m and
For latest kernel, there is a chance that btrfs/057 reports false
errors.
The false error would look like:
btrfs/057 4s ... - output mismatch (see
/home/adam/xfstests-dev/results//btrfs/057.out.bad)
--- tests/btrfs/057.out 2017-08-21 09:25:33.1 +0800
+++
For latest kernel, there is a chance that btrfs/057 reports false
errors.
The false error would look like:
btrfs/057 4s ... - output mismatch (see
/home/adam/xfstests-dev/results//btrfs/057.out.bad)
--- tests/btrfs/057.out 2017-08-21 09:25:33.1 +0800
+++
This is one I have not seen before.
When running a simple, well-tested and well-used script that makes
backups using btrfs send | receive, I got these two errors:
At subvol snapshot
ERROR: rename o131621-1091-0 ->
usr/lib/node_modules/node-gyp/gyp/pylib/gyp/MSVSVersion.py failed: No
space left
16 matches
Mail list logo