Oh, and thanks for the "filestore btrfs snap = false" pointer. In ceph.conf, under [osd], I assume?
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Scott Laird <[email protected]> wrote: > FWIW, I figured out the ceph "out of memory" error that was keeping me > from recovering one FS: > > # ls -l /mnt > ls: cannot access /mnt/snap_3415219: Cannot allocate memory > total 5242920 > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 472 May 23 19:16 activate.monmap > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3 May 23 19:16 active > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 37 May 23 19:14 ceph_fsid > drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 11688 May 31 15:10 current > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 37 May 23 19:14 fsid > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5368709120 Jun 2 08:11 journal > -rw------- 1 root root 56 May 23 19:16 keyring > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 21 May 23 19:14 magic > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6 May 23 19:16 ready > d????????? ? ? ? ? ? snap_3415219 > drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 11688 May 31 15:10 snap_3415260 > drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 11688 May 31 15:10 snap_3415296 > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4 May 23 19:16 store_version > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 69 May 29 22:34 superblock > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 May 23 19:16 upstart > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2 May 23 19:16 whoami > > snap_3415219 is clearly corrupt. I'm going to duplicate the filesystem > (it's only 50G, doesn't take long) without the file and see if that'll work. > > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Dmitry Smirnov <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Mon, 2 Jun 2014 17:47:57 Thorwald Lundqvist wrote: >> > I'd say don't use btrfs at all, it has proven unstable for us in >> production >> > even without cache. It's just not ready for production use. >> >> Perception of stability depends on experience. For instance some consider >> XFS >> to be ready for production but it does not tolerate power loss which lead >> to >> loss of data. Also fixing corrupted XFS may not be possible due to >> xfs_repair >> memory requirements. >> >> Ready for production or not depends on testing (building confidence) and >> understanding limitations. As a matter of fact Btrfs is very stable and >> reliable on recent kernels (3.11+) if used pretty much as ext4 i.e. >> without >> advanced features (e.g. snapshots, subvolumes etc.). >> >> Linux 3.14.1 is affected by serious Btrfs regression(s) that were fixed in >> later releases. >> >> Unfortunately even latest Linux can crash and corrupt Btrfs file system if >> OSDs are using snapshots (which is the default). Due to kernel bugs >> related to >> Btrfs snapshots I also lost some OSDs until I found that snapshotting can >> be >> disabled with "filestore btrfs snap = false". >> >> So far I'm very happy with Btrfs stability on OSDs when snapshots are >> disabled. >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> Dmitry Smirnov >> GPG key : 4096R/53968D1B >> >> --- >> >> Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under. >> -- H. L. Mencken >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ceph-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >> >> >
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
