On 2016-06-21 15:17, Graham Cobb wrote: > On 21/06/16 12:51, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: >> The scrub design works, but the whole state file thing has some rather >> irritating side effects and other implications, and developed out of >> requirements that aren't present for balance (it might be nice to check >> how many chunks actually got balanced after the fact, but it's not >> absolutely necessary). > > Actually, that would be **really** useful. I have been experimenting > with cancelling balances after a certain time (as part of my > "balance-slowly" script). I have got it working, just using bash > scripting, but it means my script does not know whether any work has > actually been done by the balance run which was cancelled (if no work > was done, but it timed out anyway, there is probably no point trying > again with the same timeout later!).
Additionally it would be nice if balance/scrub reports the status via /proc in human readable manner (similar to /proc/mdstat). -- With best regards, Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
