newer kernel:
https://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/
While for systems without btrfs I'd rather stick with a distribution
kernel, for systems with btrfs - I'd typically use a ppa kernel from
above.
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
Tried to run metadata-only balance a btrfs filesystem with RAID-10
metadata to RAID-1 metadata, it failed with "No space left on device".
Seriously, 20 TB of free disk space is not enough to convert some 25 GB
of metadata to a different format? O_o
Kernel is 4.18.20.
# time btrfs balance star
It is actually more like RAID-1E which is supported by some hardware
RAID HBA. The difference is that RAID-1E is usually using strict
sequential block placement algorithm and assumes disks of equal size,
while btrfs raid10 is more flexible in selecting where next mirror pair
is allocated.
s/flex
On 2019-01-14 21:34, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2019/1/14 下午7:47, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
When rebasing my qgroup + balance optimization patches, I found one
very
obvious performance regression for balance.
For normal 4G subvolume, 16 snapshots, balance workload, v4.20 kernel
only takes 3s to
When rebasing my qgroup + balance optimization patches, I found one
very
obvious performance regression for balance.
For normal 4G subvolume, 16 snapshots, balance workload, v4.20 kernel
only takes 3s to relocate a metadata block group, while for v5.0-rc1, I
don't really know how it will take as
According to btrfs wiki, some patches have been submitted to support
metadata on different devices than data (i.e. metadata on SSD, data on
HDD):
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Dedicated_metadata_drives
Dedicated metadata drives
Not claimed — submitted — Not in k
On 2019-01-03 17:22, Andrea Gelmini wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 04:43:20PM +0900, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> And it's not a default/usual configuration.
Still - it is a default configuration for some distributions. I.e.
Ubuntu
"ppa" kernels[1] have this enabled by defaul
On 2019-01-03 16:27, Andrea Gelmini wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 11:52:05AM +0900, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Did you use 4.19.x kernels earlier than 4.19.8?
They had a bug which would corrupt filesystems (mostly ext4 users
would be
reporting it, but I saw it with other filesystems, like xfs
I have several BTRFS success-stories, and I've been an happy user for
quite=
a long time now. I was therefore surprised to face a BTRFS corruption
on a=
system I'd just installed.
I use NixOS, unstable branch (linux kernel 4.19.12). The system runs on
a S=
SD with an ext4 boot partition, a simp
14490501503&r=1&w=4
To put it short - with rsync server receiving text logs from remote
servers, sometimes at slow speeds (due to how logfiles are appended):
- compress + zlib - some 20% compression ratio
- compress-force + zlib - some 80% compression ratio
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
I've started a scrub on a btrfs filesystem, then did btrfs send/receive
a couple of gigabytes, made a few snapshots... Something strange
happened to the filesystem.
rsync processes I run are hanging, "sync" never returns. Simple writes
like "date > testfile.txt" work fine.
I've canceled the s
etect the introduced corruption and fix the error, but still, it's not
safe (especially if you don't have btrfs RAID i.e. on other partitions).
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
p postfix/qmgr[2745]: 13BBE460F86: from=,
size=404, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Dec 4 05:23:14 step postfix/pickup[8993]: 40A964603EC: uid=0
from=
[...some emails follow, usual CRON messages etc., but noting at all
generated by the kernel, no hardware issue reported...]
Tomasz Chmielewski
errs0
[/dev/sda1].corruption_errs 0
[/dev/sda1].generation_errs 0
Tomasz Chmielewski
- seems the issue was unneeded discard option, so not pasting
unnecessary SMART data, thanks for finding this out.
Tomasz Chmielewski
#x27; uuid: 2b77b498-a644-430b-9dd9-2ad3d381448a
Total devices 3 FS bytes used 987.12GiB
devid1 size 1.73TiB used 804.03GiB path /dev/sda2
devid2 size 1.73TiB used 804.06GiB path /dev/sdb2
devid3 size 1.73TiB used 804.03GiB path /dev/sdc2
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
On 2018-11-10 04:20, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
On 2018-11-10 04:15, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
On 2018-11-10 03:20, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2018 03:08:01 +0900
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
After upgrading from kernel 4.16.1 to 4.19.1 and a clean restart,
the fs
no longer mounts
On 2018-11-10 04:15, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
On 2018-11-10 03:20, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2018 03:08:01 +0900
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
After upgrading from kernel 4.16.1 to 4.19.1 and a clean restart, the
fs
no longer mounts:
Did you try rebooting back to 4.16.1 to see if
On 2018-11-10 03:20, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2018 03:08:01 +0900
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
After upgrading from kernel 4.16.1 to 4.19.1 and a clean restart, the
fs
no longer mounts:
Did you try rebooting back to 4.16.1 to see if it still mounts there?
Yes, just did
open_ctree failed
Any advice how to recover?
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
unt option?
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
On 2018-02-19 13:29, Anand Jain wrote:
On 02/14/2018 10:19 PM, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Just FYI, how dangerous running btrfs can be - we had a fatal,
unrecoverable MySQL corruption when btrfs decided to do one of these
"I have ~50 GB left, so let's do out of space (and corrupt some
On 2018-02-15 16:02, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
On 2018-02-15 13:32, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Is there any kernel message like kernel warning or backtrace?
I see there was this one:
Feb 13 13:53:32 lxd01 kernel: [9351710.878404] [ cut here
]
Feb 13 13:53:32 lxd01 kernel
was
taking 2 months or so, and was not even 50% done. And the IO load the
balance was adding was slowing the things down a lot.
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.ker
On 2018-02-15 10:47, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018年02月14日 22:19, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Just FYI, how dangerous running btrfs can be - we had a fatal,
unrecoverable MySQL corruption when btrfs decided to do one of these
"I
have ~50 GB left, so let's do out of space (and corrupt som
Just FYI, how dangerous running btrfs can be - we had a fatal,
unrecoverable MySQL corruption when btrfs decided to do one of these "I
have ~50 GB left, so let's do out of space (and corrupt some files at
the same time, ha ha!)".
Running btrfs RAID-1 with kernel 4.14.
Tom
On 2017-11-27 00:37, Martin Raiber wrote:
On 26.11.2017 08:46 Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Got this one on a 4.14-rc7 filesystem with some 400 GB left:
Hi,
I guess it is too late now, but I guess the "btrfs fi usage" output of
the file system (especially after it went ro) would be us
r 4 in libmailutils.so.4.0.0[7f0c547f2000+b]
[2217605.435864] BTRFS error (device sda4): pending csums is 22380544
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More m
On 2017-11-18 10:08, Hans van Kranenburg wrote:
On 11/18/2017 01:49 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
I'm getting the following BUG when running balance on one of my
systems:
[ 3458.698704] BTRFS info (device sdb3): relocating block group
306045779968 flags data|raid1
[ 3466.892933] BTRFS
4ee47d5fb88
[ 3498.167892] ---[ end trace 6a751a3020dd3086 ]---
[ 3499.572729] BTRFS info (device sdb3): relocating block group
304972038144 flags data|raid1
[ 3504.068432] BTRFS info (device sdb3): found 2037 extents
[ 3538.281808] BTRFS info (device sdb3): found 2037 extents
Tomasz Chmiel
se it should be
considered very thoroughly.
Shouldn't "Balance" be marked as "mostly OK" or "Unstable" here? Giving
it "OK" status is misleading.
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
To unsubscrib
On 2017-10-31 23:18, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
On 2017-09-18 17:20, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
# df -h /var/lib/lxd
FWIW, standard (aka util-linux) df is effectively useless in a
situation
such as this, as it really doesn't give you the information you need
(it
can say you have lots of
On 2017-10-31 23:18, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
On a different server, however, it failed badly:
# time btrfs balance start /srv
WARNING:
Full balance without filters requested. This operation is very
intense and takes potentially very long. It is recommended to
use the
On 2017-09-18 17:20, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
# df -h /var/lib/lxd
FWIW, standard (aka util-linux) df is effectively useless in a
situation
such as this, as it really doesn't give you the information you need
(it
can say you have lots of space available, but if btrfs has all of it
allo
On 2017-10-04 20:20, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
On 2017-10-04 07:13, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Kernel: 4.13.4, btrfs RAID-1.
Disk usage more or less like below (yes, I know about btrfs fi df /
show / usage):
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda3 424G 262G 161G
27;WiredTiger.turtle.set': No such file or directory
What is this file, and why does it exist if it doesn't? How do I remove
it?
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to ma
e server".
But I've removed some 65 GB data, so now it's 171 GB free, or, 60% used
filesystem.
The balance still fails.
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...
On 2017-09-18 17:29, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski
wrote:
# df -h /var/lib/lxd
FWIW, standard (aka util-linux) df is effectively useless in a
situation
such as this, as it really doesn't give you the information you need
(it
can say you
But chances are pretty good that one you get that patch integrated,
whether by integrating it yourself to what you have currently, or by
trying 4.14-rc1 or waiting until it hits release or stable, that bug
will
have been squashed! =:^)
OK, will wait for 4.14.
Tomasz Chmielewski
https
o (device sda3): found 7299 extents
[46914.188044] BTRFS info (device sda3): found 7299 extents
[46914.303476] BTRFS info (device sda3): relocating block group
2947936616448 flags metadata|raid1
[46939.570810] BTRFS info (device sda3): found 42022 extents
[46945.053488] BTRFS info (device sda3): 2 eno
em like a bug to me to error with "no space left", when
there is a lot of space left?
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
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
On 2017-09-08 13:33, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Just got this one in dmesg with btrfs RAID-1 on top of Linux software
RAID-5.
Should say: with btrfs _single_ on top of Linux software RAID-5.
Why does it say "No space left" if we have 9 TB free there?
[233787.920933] BTRFS: T
2.00
Global reserve: 512.00MiB (used: 0.00B)
Data,single: Size:12.84TiB, Used:7.13TiB
/dev/md2 12.84TiB
Metadata,DUP: Size:79.00GiB, Used:77.87GiB
/dev/md2 158.00GiB
System,DUP: Size:8.00MiB, Used:1.48MiB
/dev/md2 16.00MiB
Unallocated:
/dev/md23.31TiB
6047] RDX: 7f86700ada30 RSI:
000a RDI: 043c
May 17 07:47:53 lxd02 kernel: [43865.596049] RBP: 7f86700ac620 R08:
R09: 3df7938e
May 17 07:47:53 lxd02 kernel: [43865.596050] R10: 7f4cf401ca80 R11:
0293 R12: 01207fe0
May 17 07:
chunk_objectid
256 flags 17 usage 0.05
total_free 255213842432 min_used 409600 free_of_min_used 7979008
block_group_of_min_used 915121242112
balance block group (915121242112) can reduce the number of data block
group
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
To unsubscribe from this
db3
After upgrading to 4.8rc8, "used" value dropped, so hopefully it's fixed
now.
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
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
per 1.2 level 5, 512k chunk, algorithm 2
[4/4] []
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
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
time (how often?):
1) btrfs fi show /mountpoint(s)
2) if "used" is more than 90% (or 80%? or 70%?) of "size" - run a full
balance
3) ...unless "btrfs fi df" shows that "used" is 95% (?) or more of
"total", then don't bother, as we'
Yes, have it disabled already (for their datadirs).
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
On 2016-09-20 16:30, Peter Becker wrote:
for the future. disable COW for all database containers
2016-09-20 9:28 GMT+02:00 Peter Becker :
* If this NOT solve the "No space left" issues you m
(less than 140 GB out of 423 GB is in
use)?
On other systems, I see that "used" from "btrfs fi show" more or less
matches the output of "btrfs fi df"; here - everything is allocated.
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
On 2016-09-20 15:58, Hugo Mills wro
=8.00MiB, used=80.00KiB
Metadata, RAID1: total=6.00GiB, used=4.86GiB
GlobalReserve, single: total=512.00MiB, used=0.00B
# df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda3 424G 137G 286G 33% /var/lib/lxd
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
To unsubscribe from this li
6e9c12 ]---
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
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
On 2016-08-06 00:45, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
And, miracle cure O_o
# file ./2016-08-02/serverX/syslog.log
ERROR: cannot read `./2016-08-02/serverX/syslog.log' (Input/output
error)
# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# file 2016-08-02/serverX/syslog.log
2016-08-02/serverX/sy
It is mounted, yes. Does btrfs-debug-tree need an unmounted FS?
I'm not able to unmount it unfortunately (in sense, the system has to
work).
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body
On 2016-08-06 00:38, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Too big for the known problem though. Still, can you btrfs-debug-tree
and just make sure it doesn't have inline items?
Hmmm
# btrfs-debug-tree /dev/xvdb > /root/debug.tree
parent transid verify failed on 355229302784 wanted 499432
fs-debug-tree(btrfs_print_tree+0x26a)[0x41acf6]
btrfs-debug-tree(main+0x9a5)[0x432589]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf5)[0x7f2369de0f45]
btrfs-debug-tree[0x4070e9]
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs
On 2016-08-05 23:26, Chris Mason wrote:
On 08/05/2016 07:42 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
I'm getting occasional (every few weeks) input/output errors on a
btrfs
filesystem with compress-force=zlib, running on Amazon EC2, with 4.5.2
kernel:
# cat 2016-08-02/serverX/syslog.log
cat: 2016-
path /dev/xvdb
# btrfs fi df /var/log/remote/
Data, single: total=149.00GiB, used=144.50GiB
System, single: total=4.00MiB, used=48.00KiB
Metadata, single: total=4.01GiB, used=2.05GiB
GlobalReserve, single: total=512.00MiB, used=0.00B
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://lxadm.com
--
To unsubscribe from
On 2016-07-11 22:56, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 22:45:13 +0900
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
So, weird, isn't it?
What's wrong there?
Your systemd unmounts it immediately from /home, search the archives
there's
been a funny story like that recently.
Yes, coul
evice sda4): disk space caching is enabled
[382190.199370] BTRFS: has skinny extents
What's wrong there?
Tomasz Chmielewski
https://wpkg.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
Mor
On 2016-07-05 15:55, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
On 2016-07-05 14:56, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Getting this lengthy output logged, and the fs mounter read-only after
a power outage.
Tried also 4.6.3, but it ends just alike.
Jul 5 02:04:20 bkp011 kernel: [ 799.298303] [ cut here
On 2016-07-05 14:56, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Getting this lengthy output logged, and the fs mounter read-only after
a power outage.
Tried also 4.6.3, but it ends just alike.
Jul 5 02:04:20 bkp011 kernel: [ 799.298303] [ cut here
]
Jul 5 02:04:20 bkp011 kernel
Getting this lengthy output logged, and the fs mounter read-only after a
power outage.
Tried also 4.6.3, but it ends just alike.
Jul 5 02:04:20 bkp011 kernel: [ 799.298303] [ cut here
]
Jul 5 02:04:20 bkp011 kernel: [ 799.298335] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1896
at /home
362.034200] BTRFS info (device sdb1):
delayed_refs has NO entry
Jun 14 07:50:26 ativ kernel: [57362.034220] BTRFS error (device sdb1):
commit super ret -5
Jun 14 07:50:26 ativ kernel: [57362.034339] BTRFS error (device sdb1):
cleaner transaction attach returned -30
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://w
ibute
read requests across all devices
to maximise performance.
Raid5
(...)
This also allows more parallelism when reading, as read requests are
distributed over all the devices
in the array instead of all but one.
Are there any plans to improve this is btrfs?
T
On 2016-05-12 15:03, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
FYI, I'm still getting this with 4.5.3, which probably means the fix
was not yet included ("No space left" at snapshot time):
/var/log/postgresql/postgresql-9.3-main.log:2016-05-11 06:06:10 UTC
LOG: could not close temporary
OG:
could not close temporary statistics file "pg_stat_tmp/global.tmp": No
space left on device
I've tried mounting with space_cache=v2, but it didn't help.
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux
s queued:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg52478.html
But maybe that meant 4.5 or 4.6 only? While the bug is affecting people
on
4.4.x today.
Does it mean 4.5 also doesn't have it yet?
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsu
napshotting? If
yes, then
you should try the patch https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7967161/
(Too bad this was not included into 4.4.1.)
By the way - was it included in any later kernel? I'm running 4.4.5 on
that server, but still hitting the same issue.
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.or
ve is what you want!
LXD is particularly easy to run unprivileged containers:
https://linuxcontainers.org/ (starts containers as unprivileged by
default, and has lots of many goodies in general).
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubsc
On 2016-02-08 20:24, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Mon, 08 Feb 2016 18:22:34 +0900
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Linux 4.4.0 - btrfs is mainly used to host lots of test containers,
often snapshots, and at times, there is heavy IO in many of them for
extended periods of time. btrfs is on HDDs.
Every
devid2 size 2.63TiB used 1.26TiB path /dev/sdb4
btrfs-progs v4.0.1
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
--
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
=68bb462d42a963169bf7acbe106aae08c17129a5
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs.git/commit/?id=4bcbb33255131adbe481c0467df26d654ce3bc78
Linux 4.3.0.
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the
e=zlib, for 100% text files/logs.
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
--
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
.
Is 20% reasonable saving for zlib? Typically text compresses much better
with that algorithm, although I understand that we have several
limitations when applying that on a filesystem level.
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
new mail reporting the hang?
Thanks,
Qu
在 2015年06月14日 15:58, Tomasz Chmielewski 写道:
On 2015-06-14 09:30, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
On 2015-06-13 08:23, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
I did get it from /var/crash/ though - is it more useful? I don't
have
vmlinux for this kernel though, but ha
On 2015-06-14 09:30, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
On 2015-06-13 08:23, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
I did get it from /var/crash/ though - is it more useful? I don't have
vmlinux for this kernel though, but have just built 4.1-rc7 with the
same config, can try to get the crash there.
I'v
On 2015-06-13 08:23, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
I did get it from /var/crash/ though - is it more useful? I don't have
vmlinux for this kernel though, but have just built 4.1-rc7 with the
same config, can try to get the crash there.
I've uploaded a crash dump and vmlinux h
855815] Code: 45 98 48 39 d8 0f 84 ad 00 00 00 48 8d 45 a8 48 83
c0 18 48 89 45 90 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 48 8b 13 48 8b 43 08 4c 89 ef 4c 8d
73 88 <48> 89 42 08 48 89 10 48 89 1b 48 89 5b 08 e8 4f 3b 6b c1 e8 3a
[45705.855906] RIP []
btrfs_wait_pending_ordered+0x5e/0x110 [btrfs]
[45705.855944]
much harder to debug for us.
It's quite possible that some codes go mad and pass a NULL pointer,
and then wait_event() is called on the NULL->some_member.
Anyway, backtrace is needed to debug this.
If syslog can't help, what about kdump + crash to get the backtrace?
I'll try t
_event(wait_queue_head_t *q,
wait_queue_t *wait, int state)
kernel/sched/wait.c:EXPORT_SYMBOL(prepare_to_wait_event);
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kern
7860.151014] CR2: 0008
[57860.151186] ---[ end trace f41cd52aa31494ac ]---
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
--
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
ced readonly
[67344.634010] BTRFS warning (device sdb5): Skipping commit of aborted
transaction.
[67344.634098] BTRFS: error (device sdb5) in cleanup_transaction:1670:
errno=-22 unknown
[67344.634186] BTRFS info (device sdb5): delayed_refs has NO entry
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://www.sslrack.
On 2015-03-23 22:48, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski
wrote:
Got this with 4.0.0-rc5 when doing a degraded mount:
Do you get this every time, even after going back to rc4?
Actually, I didn'
server1 kernel: [ 861.791031] BTRFS: unable to add free
space :-17
Mar 23 13:13:29 server1 kernel: [ 911.761852] BTRFS: unable to add free
space :-17
Mar 23 13:13:53 server1 kernel: [ 936.124674] BTRFS: unable to add free
space :-17
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://www.sslrack.com
--
To
On 2015-02-16 19:40, Liu Bo wrote:
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND
6269 root 20 0 000 R 92.5 0.0 2769:33
btrfs-transacti
22247 root 20 0 000 R 92.5 0.0 42:38.65
kworker/u16:16
Can you cat /proc/22247/stack and
I had a failed drive in RAID-1, so it was replaced with a good one,
followed by:
btrfs device add /dev/sdb4 /home
btrfs device delete missing /home
4 days later, it got to a state when there is no IO anymore (according
to iostat), "btrfs device delete missing" did not complete:
# uptime
03
] [] ?
kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x43/0x43
[197051.342819] [] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
[197051.342880] [] ?
kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x43/0x43
[197051.342944] ---[ end trace 5d57d07bb94831a2 ]---
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://www.sslrack.com
On 2015-01-04 07:58, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Got
eserve_metadata(trans, inode);
BUG_ON(ret); /* -ENOSPC in reservation; Logic error? JDM
*/
}
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://www.sslrack.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More maj
8a a2 35 c1 e9 f9 fe ff ff 0f
1f 44
[15948.236017] RIP [] btrfs_orphan_add+0x1a9/0x1c0
[btrfs]
[15948.236017] RSP
[15948.761942] ---[ end trace 0ccd21c265dce56b ]---
# ls
bigfile2.img bigfile.img
# touch 1
(...never returned...)
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://www.sslrack.com
--
To unsubscribe from t
]
[1262648.804169] [] kthread+0xcd/0xd5
[1262648.804215] [] ?
kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x43/0x43
[1262648.804264] [] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
[1262648.804311] [] ?
kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x43/0x43
[1262648.804360] ---[ end trace b76fd72b4be63515 ]---
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http
2.38TiB
/dev/sdb4, ID: 2
Device size: 2.63TiB
Data,RAID1:252.00GiB
Metadata,RAID1: 3.00GiB
System,RAID1:8.00MiB
Unallocated: 2.38TiB
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://www.sslrack.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the li
an_add+0x1a9/0x1c0
[btrfs]
[15948.236017] RSP
[15948.761942] ---[ end trace 0ccd21c265dce56b ]---
# ls
bigfile2.img bigfile.img
# touch 1
(...never returned...)
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://www.sslrack.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
On 2014-12-19 22:47, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 12/12/2014 09:37 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
FYI, still seeing this with 3.18 (scrub passes fine on this
filesystem).
# time btrfs balance start /mnt/lxc2
Segmentation fault
Ok now I remember why I haven't fix this yet, the images you ga
On 2014-12-15 21:07, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 12/12/2014 09:37 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
FYI, still seeing this with 3.18 (scrub passes fine on this
filesystem).
# time btrfs balance start /mnt/lxc2
Segmentation fault
real322m32.153s
user0m0.000s
sys 16m0.930s
Sorry Tomasz
like that after all.
Also I'm in the opinion that balance should not cause the kernel to BUG
- it should abort, possibly remount the fs ro etc. (suggest running
btrfsck, if there is enough confidence in this tool), but definitely not
BUG.
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://www.sslrack.com
--
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
if btrfs is
behaving stable. While I have systems with btrfs which are running fine
for months, I also have ones which will crash after 1-2 weeks (once the
system grows in size / complexity).
So hopefully, btrfsck had fixed that fs - once it is running stable for
a week or two, I might be b
allocated: 2779865800704
referenced 3446026993664
Btrfs v3.17.3
real76m27.845s
user19m1.470s
sys 2m55.690s
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://www.sslrack.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kern
On 2014-12-12 23:34, Robert White wrote:
On 12/12/2014 01:46 PM, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
On 2014-12-12 22:36, Robert White wrote:
In another thread [that was discussing SMART] you talked about
replacing a drive and then needing to do some patching-up of the
result because of drive failures
.
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://www.sslrack.com
--
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
1 - 100 of 298 matches
Mail list logo
