On 14/01/13 16:34, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 09:32:25AM -0700, Tomasz Kusmierz wrote:
On 14/01/13 15:57, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 08:22:36AM -0700, Tomasz Kusmierz wrote:
On 14/01/13 14:59, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 04:09:47AM -0700, Tomasz Kusmierz wrote:
Hi,
Since I had some free time over Christmas, I decided to conduct few
tests over btrFS to se how it will cope with "real life storage" for
normal "gray users" and I've found that filesystem will always mess up
your files that are larger than 10GB.
Hi Tom,
I'd like to nail down the test case a little better.
1) Create on one drive, fill with data
2) Add a second drive, convert to raid1
3) find corruptions?
What happens if you start with two drives in raid1? In other words, I'm
trying to see if this is a problem with the conversion code.
-chris
Ok, my description might be a bit enigmatic so to cut long story short
tests are:
1) create a single drive default btrfs volume on single partition ->
fill with test data -> scrub -> admire errors.
2) create a raid1 (-d raid1 -m raid1) volume with two partitions on
separate disk, each same size etc. -> fill with test data -> scrub ->
admire errors.
3) create a raid10 (-d raid10 -m raid1) volume with four partitions on
separate disk, each same size etc. -> fill with test data -> scrub ->
admire errors.
all disks are same age + size + model ... two different batches to avoid
same time failure.
Ok, so we have two possible causes. #1 btrfs is writing garbage to your
disks. #2 something in your kernel is corrupting your data.
Since you're able to see this 100% of the time, lets assume that if #2
were true, we'd be able to trigger it on other filesystems.
So, I've attached an old friend, stress.sh. Use it like this:
stress.sh -n 5 -c -s
It will run in a loop with 5 parallel processes and make 5 copies of
your data set into the destination. It will run forever until there are
errors. You can use a higher process count (-n) to force more
concurrency and use more ram. It may help to pin down all but 2 or 3 GB
of your memory.
What I'd like you to do is find a data set and command line that make
the script find errors on btrfs. Then, try the same thing on xfs or
ext4 and let it run at least twice as long. Then report back ;)
-chris
Chris,
Will do, just please be remember that 2TB of test data on "customer
grade" sata drives will take a while to test :)
Many thanks. You might want to start with a smaller data set, 20GB or
so total.
-chris
Chris & all,
Sorry for not replying for that long but Chris old friend "stress.sh"
have proven that all my storage is affected with this bug and first
thing was to bring everything down before corruptions will spread any
further. Anyway for subject sake btrfs stress have failed after 2h, ext4
stress have failed after 8h (according to "time ./stress.sh blablabla" )
- so it might be related to that ext4 always seamed slower on my machine
than btrfs.
Anyway I wanted to use this opportunity to thank Chris and everybody
related to btrfs development - your file system found a hidden bug in my
set up that would be there until it would pretty much corrupt
everything. I don't even want to think how much my main storage got
corrupted over time (etx4 over lvm over md raid 5).
p.s. bizzare that when I "fill" ext4 partition with test data everything
check's up OK (crc over all files), but with Chris tool it gets
corrupted - for both Adaptec crappy pcie controller and for mother board
built in one. Also since courses of history proven that my testing
facilities are crap - any suggestion's on how can I test ram, cpu &
controller would be appreciated.
--
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
