Re: data DUP

2013-04-28 Thread Roger Binns
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 27/04/13 19:53, Alex Elsayed wrote: When using btrfs, run a recent kernel :P. Every software developer says that of what they produce. Newer is almost always better in many different axes. Honestly, even leaving aside the lack of backporting,

[PATCH RFC] btrfs-progs: don't allow to delete default subvolume

2013-04-28 Thread Eryu Guan
Default subvolume set via 'set-default' command can be deleted now # Create btrfs and a subvolume [root@localhost ~]# mkfs -t btrfs /dev/sda5 [root@localhost ~]# mount /dev/sda5 /mnt/btrfs [root@localhost ~]# btrfs sub create /mnt/btrfs/vol_1 Create subvolume

Btrfs performance problem; metadata size to blame?

2013-04-28 Thread John .
Hi guys, My Btrfs fs has a performance problem which I hope you can help me solve. I have a dataset of around 3.15 TiB, that has lived on a ZFS volume for almost two years (ZRAID1, 4 2TiB disks). In order to move to Btrfs I bought myself a 4TiB disk with the idea of buying a new one next week and

Re: Btrfs performance problem; metadata size to blame?

2013-04-28 Thread John .
I use Ubuntu with kernel 3.8.0-19-generic. I also tested with the latest live disk of Arch Linux; write performance was the same (bad). My mount options: rw,compress=lzo. Iotop does not show any strange disk activity. 2013/4/28 Harald Glatt m...@hachre.de: On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:10 PM, John

Re: Btrfs performance problem; metadata size to blame?

2013-04-28 Thread Harald Glatt
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:18 PM, John . btrfsp...@gmail.com wrote: I use Ubuntu with kernel 3.8.0-19-generic. I also tested with the latest live disk of Arch Linux; write performance was the same (bad). My mount options: rw,compress=lzo. Iotop does not show any strange disk activity.

Re: Btrfs performance problem; metadata size to blame?

2013-04-28 Thread John .
I just started up my usenet reader (which generate a lot of small files) and transferred two large files (7,5GiB) at the same time. Performance seems all right again! :D Thanks! Could you explain to me why each of the options could have a positive effect on performance? The wiki explains what the

Re: Btrfs performance problem; metadata size to blame?

2013-04-28 Thread Harald Glatt
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:53 PM, John . btrfsp...@gmail.com wrote: I just started up my usenet reader (which generate a lot of small files) and transferred two large files (7,5GiB) at the same time. Performance seems all right again! :D Thanks! Could you explain to me why each of the options

Re: Btrfs performance problem; metadata size to blame?

2013-04-28 Thread Roger Binns
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 28/04/13 12:57, Harald Glatt wrote: If you want better answers ... There is a lot of good information at the wiki and it does see regular updates. For example the performance mount options are on this page:

Re: Btrfs performance problem; metadata size to blame?

2013-04-28 Thread cwillu
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Roger Binns rog...@rogerbinns.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 28/04/13 12:57, Harald Glatt wrote: If you want better answers ... There is a lot of good information at the wiki and it does see regular updates. For example the

Re: Btrfs performance problem; metadata size to blame?

2013-04-28 Thread cwillu
[how'd that send button get there] space_cache is the default, set by mkfs, for a year or so now. It's sticky, so even if it wasn't, you'd only need to mount with it once. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to