On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 11:42:39AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
https://oss.oracle.com/~mason/latencytop.patch
Thanks for the patch, and yes I can confirm I'm definitely not pegged on CPU
(not even close and I get the same problem with unencrypted filesystem,
actually
du -sh is exactly the
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
So, clearly, there is something wrong with the samsung 830 SSD with linux
It it were a random crappy SSD from a random vendor, I'd blame the SSD, but
I have a hard time believing that samsung is selling SSDs that are slower
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:08:46PM +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
It it were a random crappy SSD from a random vendor, I'd blame the SSD, but
I have a hard time believing that samsung is selling SSDs that are slower
than hard drives at random IO and 'seeks'.
You'd be surprised on how
On 01/08/12 16:01, Marc MERLIN wrote:
Third, A freshly made ntfs filesystem through fuse is actually FASTER!
Could it be that Samsungs FTL has optimisations in it for NTFS ?
A horrible thought, but not impossible..
--
Chris Samuel : http://www.csamuel.org/ : Melbourne, VIC
--
To
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 04:36:22PM +1000, Chris Samuel wrote:
On 01/08/12 16:01, Marc MERLIN wrote:
Third, A freshly made ntfs filesystem through fuse is actually FASTER!
Could it be that Samsungs FTL has optimisations in it for NTFS ?
A horrible thought, but not impossible..
Not
In iterate_inodes_from_logical() the error result from
extent_from_logical() is patched by mistake. Typically ENOENT is
patched to EINVAL because (-ENOENT BTRFS_EXTENT_FLAG_TREE_BLOCK)
evaluates to true.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens sbehr...@giantdisaster.de
---
Resent because of the previously
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Alex Lyakas
alex.bolshoy.bt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Alexander,
I relooked at my list of questions, and it seems that there are more
general questions, and more focused questions. So here I list the
more focused ones. I really appreciate if you can address them.
On 08/01/2012 05:16 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Hi Bo,
On 07/31/2012 07:49 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
The idea is that we usually use snapshot to backup/restore our data, and the
common way can be a cron script which makes lots of snapshots, so we can end
up with spending some time to find the
With commit acce952b0, btrfs was changed to flag the filesystem with
BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_ERROR and switch to read-only mode after a fatal
error happened like a write I/O errors of all mirrors.
In such situations, on unmount, the superblock is written in
btrfs_error_commit_super(). This is done with
On 08/01/2012 07:45 PM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
With commit acce952b0, btrfs was changed to flag the filesystem with
BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_ERROR and switch to read-only mode after a fatal
error happened like a write I/O errors of all mirrors.
In such situations, on unmount, the superblock is written
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 03:30:49PM -0600, Zach Brown wrote:
+static void btrfs_direct_read_iodone(struct kiocb *iocb, loff_t offset,
+ssize_t bytes, void *private, int ret,
+bool is_async)
+{
+ struct inode *inode =
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Dan Carpenter
dan.carpen...@oracle.com wrote:
trans-transid is cpu endian but we want to store the data as little
endian. item-ctime.nsec is only 32 bits, not 64.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter dan.carpen...@oracle.com
---
Applies to linux-next.
diff --git
On 08/01/2012 08:01 PM, Anand jain wrote:
From: Anand anand.j...@oracle.com
This patch adds creation-time to the snapshot list display,
which would help user to better manage the snapshots when
number of snapshots grow substantially. This patch is developed
and on top of the
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Alex Lyakas
alex.bolshoy.bt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Alexander,
I did some testing of the case where same inode, but with a different
generation, exists both in send_root and in parent_root.
I know that this can happen primarily when inode_cache option is
On 08/01/2012 09:07 PM, Jan Schmidt wrote:
On Wed, August 01, 2012 at 14:02 (+0200), Liu Bo wrote:
On 08/01/2012 07:45 PM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
With commit acce952b0, btrfs was changed to flag the filesystem with
BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_ERROR and switch to read-only mode after a fatal
error
On 01.08.2012 15:31, Liu Bo wrote:
On 08/01/2012 09:07 PM, Jan Schmidt wrote:
On Wed, August 01, 2012 at 14:02 (+0200), Liu Bo wrote:
On 08/01/2012 07:45 PM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
With commit acce952b0, btrfs was changed to flag the filesystem with
BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_ERROR and switch to
Eg output:
#btrfs su list -s 1 /btrfs
ID 258 gen 39 cgen 6 top level 5 crtime 2012-07-27 17:43:55 path ss1
ID 260 gen 8 cgen 8 top level 5 crtime 2012-07-27 17:47:51 path ss2
ID 263 gen 16 cgen 16 top level 5 crtime 2012-07-29 00:50:19 path ss3
ID 264 gen 25 cgen 25 top
A deadlock in xfstests 113 was uncovered by commit
d187663ef24cd3d033f0cbf2867e70b36a3a90b8
This is because we would not return EIOCBQUEUED for short AIO reads, instead
we'd wait for the DIO to complete and then return the amount of data we
transferred, which would allow our stuff to unlock the
Alexander,
thanks for addressing the issues.
__get_cur_name_and_parent()
if we decided to call get_first_ref() on the send_root (due to ino
sctx-send_progress), do we really need to call did_overwrite_ref()?
Because it will just lookup the send root again. I mean if we know
that this inode
Hi,
I have some trouble with a btrfs filesystem.
As you can see in logs, there is lines which are from btrfs (I supposed), then
some warnings at fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c, and finally a kernel BUG at
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:5038.
Do you need more informations ?
Aug 1 21:23:10 backup2 kernel: [
We need an smb_mb() before waitqueue_active to avoid missing wakeups.
Before Mitch was hitting a deadlock between the ordered flushers and the
transaction commit because the ordered flushers were waiting for more refs
and were never woken up, so those smp_mb()'s are the most important.
Everything
Hi Marc,
Am Mittwoch, 1. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:08:46PM +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
It it were a random crappy SSD from a random vendor, I'd blame the
SSD, but I have a hard time believing that samsung is selling SSDs
that are slower than hard
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote:
We need an smb_mb() before waitqueue_active to avoid missing wakeups.
Before Mitch was hitting a deadlock between the ordered flushers and the
transaction commit because the ordered flushers were waiting for more refs
and
Hi Miao,
There are new compile warnings show up in
tree: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next.git
master
head: 8e1163044779e90662e96887cdd692c1594146ad
commit: dd817e81e81bbb83b63317b169d0e57a5d7ae0e1 [9/11] Btrfs: fix error path
in create_pending_snapshot()
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:31:23 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
There are new compile warnings show up in
tree: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next.git
master
head: 8e1163044779e90662e96887cdd692c1594146ad
commit: dd817e81e81bbb83b63317b169d0e57a5d7ae0e1 [9/11] Btrfs:
The snapshot should be the image of the fs tree before it was created,
so the metadata of the snapshot should not exist in the its tree. But now, we
found the directory item and directory name index is in both the snapshot tree
and the fs tree. It introduces some problems and makes the users feel
26 matches
Mail list logo
