Am Donnerstag, 14. März 2013 schrieb Norbert Scheibner:
Am 13.03.2013, 12:31 Uhr, schrieb Swâmi Petaramesh sw...@petaramesh.org:
Le 13/03/2013 11:56, Bart Noordervliet a écrit :
USB flash drives are rubbish for any filesystem except FAT32 and then
still only gracefully accept large
Hi Hugo,
Am Samstag, 9. März 2013 schrieb Hugo Mills:
Some time ago, and occasionally since, we've discussed altering the
RAID-n terminology to change it to an nCmSpP format, where n is the
number of copies, m is the number of (data) devices in a stripe per copy,
and p is the number of
Am Sonntag, 10. März 2013 schrieb Harald Glatt:
Very good points,
I was also gonna write something by the lines of 'all that matters is
achieving the minimum amount of redundancy, as requested by the user,
at the maximum possible performance'.
After reading your post now, Roger,
Am Sonntag, 10. März 2013 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
Hi all,
Hi Goffredo,
This is the third attempt of my patches related to show how the data
are stored in a btrfs filesystem. I rebased all the patches on the latest
mason git. I tried to address the Zach concern abou the using of
the
Am Sonntag, 10. März 2013 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Am Sonntag, 10. März 2013 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
Hi all,
Hi Goffredo,
This is the third attempt of my patches related to show how the data
are stored in a btrfs filesystem. I rebased all the patches on the
latest mason git
Am Mittwoch, 27. Februar 2013 schrieb Ahmet Inan:
Yeah we have a lot of
ptr = kmalloc();
BUG_ON(ptr);
everywhere. I'll fix this one up but I really need to sit down and go
through all of them and make sure we do the right thing in all these
places. Thanks,
But what would be
Am Donnerstag, 28. Februar 2013 schrieb Swâmi Petaramesh:
BTW...
I'm not even sure that btrfs filesystem defrag somefile actually
does anything...
If I run filefrag somefile afterwards, it typically shows the same
number of fragments that it did prior to running defrag...
I'm not sure
Am Mittwoch, 27. Februar 2013 schrieb Roman Mamedov:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:23:23 +1100
Fajar A. Nugraha l...@fajar.net wrote:
Not to mention the hassle in accessing the data if it resides on a
partition inside the file (e.g. you need losetup + kpartx to access it,
and you must remember
Am Mittwoch, 27. Februar 2013 schrieb Dave Jones:
Something I've yet to repeat managed to leak a whole bunch of memory
while I was travelling, and locked up my workstation.
When I got home, this was the last thing printed out before it locked up
(it did make it into the logs thankfully)
Am Dienstag, 26. Februar 2013 schrieb Fajar A. Nugraha:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Mike Fleetwood
mike.fleetw...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 25 February 2013 23:35, Suman C schakr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I think it would be great if there is a lvm volume or zfs zvol type
support
Am Dienstag, 26. Februar 2013 schrieb Tsutomu Itoh:
Therefore I want you to revert
commit:2a2d8e1962e8b6cda7b0a7584f6d2fb95d442cb6.
btrfs-progs: require mkfs -f force option to overwrite filesystem
or partition table
How do you think about it?
What if you submit a patch to
Am Montag, 25. Februar 2013 schrieb Zach Brown:
I updates my previous patches [1] to add support for raid5/6.
These patches update the btrfs fi df command and add two new commands:
- btrfs filesystem disk-usage path
- btrfs device disk-usage path
This seems like a ton of code.
Here's
-By: Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
Only for -d single and -m single, I have RAID-1 at workstation at work,
but will take some time till I get to office again.
No RAID-5/6 setup at the moment. So test obviously not complete yet.
merkaba:~ /tmp/btrfs fi sh
failed to read /dev/sr0
Label: 'home
Am Dienstag, 26. Februar 2013 schrieb Gareth Pye:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
I´d still like that for df, whose output is quite bogus in certain
BTRFS setups at the moment and does not give applications a realistic
estimate at all. One
Am Dienstag, 26. Februar 2013 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Am Dienstag, 26. Februar 2013 schrieb Gareth Pye:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
I´d still like that for df, whose output is quite bogus in certain
BTRFS setups at the moment
Am Dienstag, 26. Februar 2013 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
And I teach not to in my trainings as well.
Everyone who uses rm -rf by default even just for deleting a single
file does it as long as he or she deleted his / her home directory or
something.
Unfortunately the rm -rf is
Am Donnerstag, 21. Februar 2013 schrieb Swâmi Petaramesh:
Hi folks,
I'm using Ubuntu 12.10 Quantal with
# uname -r
3.5.0-24-generic
And it seems I cannot defrag :
# filefrag /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-24-generic
/boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-24-generic: 3 extents found
# btrfs filesystem
Am Dienstag, 11. Dezember 2012 schrieb Stefan Behrens:
This is the user mode part of the device replace patch series.
Thank you for working on this.
The command group btrfs replace is added with three commands:
- btrfs replace start srcdev|srcdevid targetdev [-Bfr] mount_point
- btrfs
Am Freitag, 15. Februar 2013 schrieb Fredrik Tolf:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
[…]
I´d restart the machine, see that BTRFS is using both devices again and
then try the balance again.
I mentioned it in another mail, but I'd very much prefer not to do that.
I'd like
Am Mittwoch, 13. Februar 2013 schrieb Fredrik Tolf:
Dear list,
Hi Fredrik,
I'm sorry if this is a dumb n3wb question, but I couldn't find anything
about it, so please bear with me.
I just decided to try BtrFS for the first time, to replace an old ReiserFS
data partition currently on a
Am Donnerstag, 14. Februar 2013 schrieb Dave Chinner:
So I
think that it got to the point where users will usually use mkfs.xfs
-f all the time. And even if they did not and they would use a wrong
device they would probably get the same warning even for the device
they wanted to use in
Am Donnerstag, 31. Januar 2013 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 02:44:12PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Hi!
Today I converted my /home from Ext4 to BTRFS by reformatting and copying
all over again.
I created the filesystem with -l 16384 -n 16384 -d single -m single
Hi!
Today I converted my /home from Ext4 to BTRFS by reformatting and copying
all over again.
I created the filesystem with -l 16384 -n 16384 -d single -m single on an
logical volume Intel SSD 320 and mount with compress=lzo,spacecache. Current
state:
merkaba:~ btrfs filesystem show
failed to
Am Mittwoch, 30. Januar 2013 schrieb David Sterba:
Hi,
Hi,
a few build warning fixes, unaligned access fix #2 and finally support
for the 'device stats' and device 'replace' commands!
Please test, worked for me here, but not tested extensively. If
everything goes well I'll send a pull
Am Donnerstag, 3. Januar 2013 schrieb Helmut Hullen:
Hallo, Hugo,
Hi Helmut,
Du meintest am 03.01.13:
[...]
Trying to use filesystem labels to give unique and stable device
IDs is the wrong tool for the job.
I beg to differ. On my machines it's the simpliest way, and it's a
sure
Am Sonntag, 9. Dezember 2012 schrieb Jan Engelhardt:
On Sunday 2012-10-07 16:48, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
# btrfs su li /
ID 256 top level 5 path UBUNTU
ID 259 top level 5 path UBUNTU/@
ID 261 top level 5 path UBUNTU/@tmp
ID 262 top level 5 path UBUNTU/@home
[...]
This could
Hi!
I have BTRFS on some systems since more than two years. My experience so
far is: Performance at the beginning is pretty good, but some of my more
often used BTRFS filesystem degrade badly in different areas. On some
workloads pretty quickly.
There are also some fs however that did not
Am Sonntag, 9. Dezember 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Hi!
I have BTRFS on some systems since more than two years. My experience so
far is: Performance at the beginning is pretty good, but some of my more
often used BTRFS filesystem degrade badly in different areas. On some
workloads
Am Freitag, 7. Dezember 2012 schrieb Sylvain Alain:
Hi, I tested the fstrim
root@sysresccd /root % time fstrim -v /mnt/gentoo
/mnt/gentoo: 8148938752 bytes were trimmed
I noticed that my btrfs hang my SSD only with small files.
I tested with removing the /usr/src/linux directory(kernel
Am Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2012 schrieb Sander:
Sylvain Alain wrote (ao):
Hi, right now I own this SSD :
Intel SSD 520 Series MLC 120 Gigs
Also, this is my /etc/fstab
/dev/sda3 /bootext2 noauto,noatime,defaults
/dev/sda1 /boot/efivfat
Am Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 11:56:27PM -0500, Sylvain Alain wrote:
Hi everyone, I'm running btrfs since octobre 2012 and I would like to
understand 2 behavior that I noticed.
1. When I delete a big directory, sometimes it can hang my box
Am Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Am Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2012 schrieb Sander:
Sylvain Alain wrote (ao):
Hi, right now I own this SSD :
Intel SSD 520 Series MLC 120 Gigs
Also, this is my /etc/fstab
/dev/sda3 /bootext2 noauto
Free (Estimated): 63.00GB (Max: 106.51GB, min: 54.96GB)
Data to disk ratio:58 %
This is coming along nicely.
Tested-By: Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
I can test on some other boxes next week, if you want to.
I just wonder about one thing:
merkaba:[…]/btrfs-progs
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
On 2012-10-25 21:21, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Hi all,
this is a new attempt to improve the output of the command btrfs
fi df.
Below you can see another iteration. I tried to address all the cwillu
requests, which to me make
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
On 2012-10-28 00:38, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 12:30:44AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Samstag, 27. Oktober 2012 schrieb Michael Kjörling:
On 27 Oct 2012 18:43 +0200, from mar...@lichtvoll.de (Martin
Michael, please keep CCs. Its usual to keep them on kernel related lists.
Thanks.
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Michael Kjörling:
On 27 Oct 2012 23:38 +0100, from h...@carfax.org.uk (Hugo Mills):
Data: RAID 0 System: RAID 1 Unused
/dev/vdb 307.25 MB
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
What was your reasoning for not using options to btrfs filesystem df?
That df doesn´t show more than disk free as well?
My feel is that a switch should change a bit a command. In this case
there are very different outputs, for
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
On 2012-10-28 12:18, Michael Kjörling wrote:
On 28 Oct 2012 11:59 +0100, from kreij...@gmail.com (Goffredo
Baroncelli):
On 2012-10-28 11:38, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
But still if if can be arbitrarily long due to that per object
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Ronnie Collinson:
In a raid1 situation, it will also rewrite the effected data, on the
drive that failed the checksum
Will it do so without an explicit scrub?
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 02:23:51PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Ronnie Collinson:
In a raid1 situation, it will also rewrite the effected data, on
the drive that failed the checksum
Will it do
Am Donnerstag, 25. Oktober 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
Hi all,
this is a new attempt to improve the output of the command btrfs fi
df.
The previous attempt received a good reception. However there was no a
general consensus about the wording.
Moreover I still didn't understand
Am Samstag, 27. Oktober 2012 schrieb Michael Kjörling:
On 27 Oct 2012 18:43 +0200, from mar...@lichtvoll.de (Martin
Steigerwald):
Possibly this could be done tabular as well, like:
vdb vdc vdd
Data, RAID 0 307,25MB307,25MB
Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
From: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
The function pretty_sizes() returns a string containing the passed
number. It add a suffix depending by the number: eg KiB, MiB.
This change replace the old SI suffix (KB, MB..) by the IEC
Single 4.00MB4.00MB 0.00
MetadataDUP 3.50GB1.75GB 696.70MB
MetadataSingle 8.00MB8.00MB 0.00
Tested-By: Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
Thanks,
Martin
You can pull this change from
http
Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
Hi All,
several people asked to update the units showed by the btrfs tool
form the SI ones (KB, MB, GB...) to the IEC ones (KiB, MiB...).
The aim of this patch is to allow the user to choice which units
are showed. Depending by the
Hi Goffredo, Bart, Hugo,
Am Dienstag, 9. Oktober 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
On 10/09/2012 02:51 PM, Bart Noordervliet wrote:
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Goffredo
Baroncellikreij...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Bart,
I replayed in another email to Hugo about that. Basically I am not
Am Mittwoch, 3. Oktober 2012 schrieb Ilya Dryomov:
$ ./btrfs filesystem df /
Path: /
Summary:
Disk_size: 72.57GB
Disk_allocated:25.10GB
Disk_unallocated: 47.48GB
Logical_size: 23.06GB
Used: 11.01GB
Am Mittwoch, 3. Oktober 2012 schrieb Ilya Dryomov:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:46:00PM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 10/03/2012 05:01 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
Type for the first column is probably enough.
Why is the third column called Chunk-size? If my understanding is
correct,
Am Donnerstag, 30. August 2012 schrieb Mitch Harder:
I've been trying out different leafsize/nodesize settings by
benchmarking some typical operations.
These changes had more impact than I expected. Using a
leafsize/nodesize of either 8192 or 16384 provided a noticeable
improvement in my
Am Freitag, 12. Oktober 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Time (seconds) to finish 7 simultaneous copy operations on a set of
Linux kernel git sources.
Leafsize/
NodesizeTime (Std Dev%)
4096 124.7 (1.25%)
8192 115.2 (0.69%)
16384114.8 (0.53%)
65536
Am Sonntag, 7. Oktober 2012 schrieb Swâmi Petaramesh:
Hi,
I have 4 machines, all converted to BTRFS about 6 months ago, now all
running Ubuntu Quantal with kernel 3.5.0-17
The matter is that all these machines are now getting slower and slower
everyday, every disk access causing the disk
Am Sonntag, 7. Oktober 2012 schrieb Swâmi Petaramesh:
Hi,
I have 4 machines, all converted to BTRFS about 6 months ago, now all
running Ubuntu Quantal with kernel 3.5.0-17
The matter is that all these machines are now getting slower and slower
everyday, every disk access causing the disk
Am Sonntag, 7. Oktober 2012 schrieb Alex Lyakas:
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Am Sonntag, 7. Oktober 2012 schrieb Alex Lyakas:
[…]
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 4
Am Sonntag, 7. Oktober 2012 schrieb Swâmi Petaramesh:
Hi,
I have 4 machines, all converted to BTRFS about 6 months ago, now all
running Ubuntu Quantal with kernel 3.5.0-17
The matter is that all these machines are now getting slower and slower
everyday, every disk access causing the disk
Am Sonntag, 7. Oktober 2012 schrieb Swâmi Petaramesh:
Hi again ;-)
Le 07/10/2012 14:33, Alex a écrit :
1. Convert to a 16k or 32k leafsize.
How should I do this ? Can I do this on a live FS, and isn't this going
to double my on-disk used space (I have active snapshots...)
I think you
Am Sonntag, 7. Oktober 2012 schrieb Swâmi Petaramesh:
Le 07/10/2012 12:59, Martin Steigerwald a écrit :
btrfs fi df (preferably with btrfs tools from Goffredo)
btrfs fi show
I don't think I miss any free space ;-)
Well I could I know this beforehand?
(From one of my machines
Am Freitag, 5. Oktober 2012 schrieb Swâmi Petaramesh:
Hi there,
I have a system on which btrfsck gives the following output... I don't
understand the meaning of the reported errors, so any clue would be
appreciated. Is this something I should worry about, or not ?
Would I be advised to
Am Donnerstag, 4. Oktober 2012 schrieb Alex Lyakas:
Hi Jan,
as I promised, here is some code for you to look at.
First I will describe the approach in general.
# Get rid of the pipe. Instead, user-space passes a buffer and kernel
fills the specified user-space buffer with commands.
#
8.00MB 8.00MB0.00
I wonder about free size estimation minimum and maximum are the same tough.
Do you have a explaination for this?
Otherwise:
Tested-By: Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
(as of commit c3f7fa95f3aa29972b79eed71ec063b6a3019017 from your repo.)
The data
Am Mittwoch, 3. Oktober 2012 schrieb Roman Mamedov:
On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 08:22:06 +0200
Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Chris Mason
chris.ma...@fusionio.com wrote: [...]
I like it, thanks. Could you please update btrfs fi df to show
Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012 schrieb Liu Bo:
On 09/19/2012 07:28 PM, ching wrote:
[…]
On 09/17/2012 07:15 PM, ching wrote:
I am testing btrfs for long-term storage and backup, and i would
like to know more about autodefrag option:
1. Will autodefrag option benefit ssd?
My
Am Dienstag, 18. September 2012 schrieb Miao Xie:
static const char * const cmd_subvol_list_usage[] = {
- btrfs subvolume list [-pu] [-s 0|1] path,
+ btrfs subvolume list [-pur] [-s 0|1] path,
List subvolumes (and snapshots),
,
-p print parent
Am Dienstag, 11. September 2012 schrieb Jan Engelhardt:
On Tuesday 2012-09-11 01:09, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
What about:
- copy first backup version
- btrfs subvol create first next
- copy next backup version
- btrfs subvol create previous next
Wouldn't btrfs subvolume
Am Samstag, 8. September 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I read the discussions on hardlinks, and saw that there was a proposed
patch (although I'm not sure if it's due in 3.6 or not, or whether I
can apply it to my 3.5.3 tree).
I was migrating a backup disk to a new btrfs disk, and the backup had
Am Montag, 10. September 2012 schrieb Fajar A. Nugraha:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Am Samstag, 8. September 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I was migrating a backup disk to a new btrfs disk, and the backup
had a lot of hardlinks to collapse
Am Donnerstag, 30. August 2012 schrieb Josef Bacik:
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 09:18:07AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
I've been trying out different leafsize/nodesize settings by
benchmarking some typical operations.
These changes had more impact than I expected. Using a
leafsize/nodesize
Am Sonntag, 5. August 2012 schrieb Florian Lindner:
Hello,
Hi Florian,
I was playing with btrfs and accidentally formatted the disk directly
(/dev/sdb instead of sdb1). Since then I rewrote the GPT partition
table, recreated the partition and ran btrfs device scan. Still, btrfs
filesystem
Am Freitag, 3. August 2012 schrieb Mark Marshall:
Hi,
Hi Mark,
I am new to btrfs, and just installed a new system with SLED 11 SP2 a
few days ago.
Now you have a nice SLED 11 SP 2 with official BTRFS support from SUSE.
Did you consider to ask SUSE support? ;)
However the system seems to
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I'll try plugging this SSD in a totally different PC and see what
happens. This may say if it's an AHCI/intel sata driver problem.
Seems we will continue until someone starts to complain here. Maybe
another list will be more
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:57:39PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Its getting quite strange.
I would agree :)
Before I paste a bunch of thing, I wanted to thank you for not giving up on
me
and offering your time to help me figure
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
So, doctor, is it bad? :)
randomwrite: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=2K-16K/2K-16K, ioengine=libaio,
iodepth=64
sequentialwrite: (g=1): rw=write, bs=2K-16K/2K-16K, ioengine=libaio,
iodepth=64
randomread: (g=2): rw=randread, bs=2K-16K/2K-16K,
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 01:18:07PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
I've the the fio tests in:
/dev/mapper/cryptroot /var btrfs
rw,noatime,compress=lzo,nossd,discard,space_cache 0 0
… you are still using dm_crypt?
[…]
I just took
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 10:20:07PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Hey, whats this? With Ext4 you have really good random read performance
now! Way better than the Intel SSD 320 and…
Yep, my du -sh tests do show that ext4 is 2x faster
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
Am Sonntag, 24. Januar 2010 schrieb Michael Niederle:
I'm using btrfs with a kernel 2.6.32.2 (builtin) as the root file
system of a Gentoo Linux installation.
Upgrade your kernel!
This kernel is wy to old for any production use of
BTRFS. Heck, upstream still did not
Am Montag, 23. Juli 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I just realized that the older thread got a bit confusing, so I'll keep
problems separate and make things simpler :)
On an _unencrypted_ partition on the SSD, running du -sh on a directory
with 15K files, takes 23 seconds on unencrypted SSD and 4
Hi Marc,
Am Sonntag, 22. Juli 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I'm still getting a bit more data before updating the btrfs wiki with
my best recommendations for today.
First, everything I've read so far says that the ssd btrfs mount option
makes btrfs slower in benchmarks.
What gives?
Anyone
Am Sonntag, 22. Juli 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Hi Marc,
Am Sonntag, 22. Juli 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I'm still getting a bit more data before updating the btrfs wiki with
my best recommendations for today.
First, everything I've read so far says that the ssd btrfs mount
Am Freitag, 20. Juli 2012 schrieb Shavi N:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2012 schrieb Shavi N:
Hi,
Hi Shavi,
Thanks.
This is the output:
btrfs:
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/shared/misc/temp_file bs
Am Freitag, 20. Juli 2012 schrieb Remco Hosman:
11 really fast 15000rpm FC / SAS disks could possibly do 936 MB/s.
But regular 7200rpm SATA disks depending to the on disk location
might be as slow as 40-50 MB/s – just try fio disk-zone-profile on
one if you do not believe this – and then
Am Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:49:36PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
I am still not convinced that dm-crypt is the best way to go about
encryption especially for SSDs. But its more of a gut feeling than
anything that I can explain easily
Hi!
Am Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2012 schrieb Bernhard Redl:
On 07/19/2012 03:42 AM, Shavi N wrote:
Hi,
I have btrfs volume, shared via samba. I have a directory of
documents that I want to backup on my server. win7 reports a
maximum of ~3.10MB/s transfer transferring the same directory on
Am Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2012 schrieb Shavi N:
Hi,
Hi Shavi,
Thanks.
This is the output:
btrfs:
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/shared/misc/temp_file bs=1M count=1400
1400+0 records in
1400+0 records out
1468006400 bytes (1.5 GB) copied, 1.56841 s, 936 MB/s
ext4:
$ dd if=/dev/zero
Am Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 08:07:02AM -0800, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 01:39:24PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
To Milan Broz: Well now I noticed that you linked to your own blog
entry.
He did not, I'm the one who did
Am Samstag, 14. Juli 2012 schrieb Skylar Burtenshaw:
Martin Steigerwald Martin at lichtvoll.de writes:
Since I didn´t found any explicit mention on it:
Did you try btrfs-zero-log on the partition prior to mounting it?
I had tried that previously, yes. Approximately the date of my first
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 schrieb haveanice...@cv-sv.de:
PS: I would bet that my kind of usage is a very good stress test for
btrfs.
- large file system /backup btrfs with compress enabled.
Content of the file system:
- ./server1 /server5 as directories
- for each server the
Am Donnerstag, 12. Juli 2012 schrieb Bernd Kohler:
Hi @ all,
Hi!
in the last edition of the german Linux-Magazin, there has been an
article about Linux filesystem performance test - the article is titled
Formel Storage - Linux-Dateisystem im Leistungstest.
The author of this article, Mr
Am Montag, 26. März 2012 schrieb Skylar Burtenshaw:
Fajar A. Nugraha list at fajar.net writes:
Didn't Chris' last response basically say use kernel 3.2 or newer,
mount the fs (possibly with -o ro), and copy the data elsewhere?
Why yes, yes it did actually. I appreciate your spotlighting
Am Freitag, 13. Juli 2012 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 02:23:53PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Montag, 26. März 2012 schrieb Skylar Burtenshaw:
Fajar A. Nugraha list at fajar.net writes:
Didn't Chris' last response basically say use kernel 3.2 or
newer, mount
Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2012 schrieb Bernd Kohler:
Hi,
Hi Bernd,
this is not really a bug in btrfs but to spread the info I will just
drop this short message:
My System (VirtualBox VM, 3 virtual HDDs with 10G, 5G and 3G) is today
installed Ubuntu 12.04 LTS 64bit with Kernel 3.2.0-26 generic,
Am Sonntag, 1. Juli 2012 schrieb Markus Rothe:
Hello,
Hi!
I am running btrfs for a few months now. I just realized that I have a
few strange directories in /
% ls / -1
?
???J??
QӇ??
PL
PR
This might be a corrupted filesystem.
Can you show ls -l /
If size is ? or
Am Sonntag, 1. Juli 2012 schrieb Waxhead:
As far as I understand btrfs stores all data in huge chunks that are
striped, mirrored or raid5/6'ed throughout all the disks added to
the filesystem/volume.
Not through all disks. At least not with the current RAID-1
implementation. It stores two
Am Sonntag, 24. Juni 2012 schrieb Alexander Block:
This patchset introduces the btrfs filesystem property command. It is
the result of a discussion we had on IRC. I tried to make the
properties interface as generic and extensible as possible. Comments
are welcome.
Currently the command
Am Dienstag, 26. Juni 2012 schrieb Liu Bo:
On 06/26/2012 06:18 AM, David Sterba wrote:
3756 if (root-fs_info-log_root_recovering) {
3757 BUG_ON(!test_bit(BTRFS_INODE_HAS_ORPHAN_ITEM,
3758 BTRFS_I(inode)-runtime_flags));
3759
Am Montag, 25. Juni 2012 schrieb Chester:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
[251818.022631] [ cut here ]
[251818.022714] WARNING: at
/media/data/mattems/src/linux-2.6-3.4.1/debian/build/source_amd64_non
e/fs/btrfs
Hi!
I got a X server / drm related crash or hard lockup. After I rebooted I
tried to mount the BTRFS on my esata disk. It has big metadata
(mkfs.btrfs -l 32768 -n 32768).
I got:
[ 43.764274] ata5: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x405 action 0xe
frozen
[ 43.764278] ata5: irq_stat
Am Montag, 25. Juni 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Hi!
I got a X server / drm related crash or hard lockup. After I rebooted I
tried to mount the BTRFS on my esata disk. It has big metadata
(mkfs.btrfs -l 32768 -n 32768).
I got:
[… backtrace …]
BTRFS was not mounted. After trying
Am Samstag, 16. Juni 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Am Samstag, 16. Juni 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Am Samstag, 16. Juni 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
merkaba:~ date ; btrfs scrub status /mnt/amazon-daten
Sa 16. Jun 22:06:33 CEST 2012
scrub status for bd94ea73-6e77-4c81-b053
Am Donnerstag, 21. Juni 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
Now we have the possibility to move the kernel near the modules, and
this could lead some interesting possibility: think about different
linux installations, with an own kernel version and an own modules
version; what are the
Am Samstag, 16. Juni 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
[246028.219701] btrfs csum failed ino 151001 off 9441280 csum
3484644058 private 2813574800
[246028.368763] btrfs csum failed ino
151001 off 9441280 csum 3484644058 private 2813574800
[…]
I have no idea where these checksum errors might
301 - 400 of 489 matches
Mail list logo
