Re: Can't mount, power failure - recoverable?

Am Samstag, 14. Juli 2012 schrieb Skylar Burtenshaw: > Martin Steigerwald 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 previousl

Re: Can't mount, power failure - recoverable?

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 fajar.net> writes: > > > > Didn't Chris' last response bas

Re: Can't mount, power failure - recoverable?

Am Montag, 26. März 2012 schrieb Skylar Burtenshaw: > Fajar A. Nugraha 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

Re: df shows wrong infos on btrfs raid (5gb and 3gb hdd)

Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2012 schrieb Bernd Kohler: > The infos, given by "btrfs fi show /dev/sdb1" and "btrfs fi df /mnt" > are ok, but df is "lieing": > > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/sdc1 8.0G 5.2G 56k 100% /mnt > > Don't get confused about used space, tried to write a 4G

Re: df shows wrong infos on btrfs raid (5gb and 3gb hdd)

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 gen

Re: Btrfs RAID space utilization and bitrot reconstruction

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 t

Re: Strange directories in /

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 p

Re: [PATCH 0/5] introduce btrfs filesystem property command

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

Re: 3.5-rc4: BTRFS unmountable after hard lockup

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)); > >

Re: 3.5-rc4: BTRFS unmountable after hard lockup

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

3.5-rc4: BTRFS unmountable after hard lockup

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 0

Re: kernel got struck while scrubbing BTRFS with node- and leafsize 32768

Am Montag, 25. Juni 2012 schrieb Chester: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > [251818.022631] [ cut here ] > > [251818.022714] WARNING: at > > > > /media/data/mattems/src/linux-2.6-3.4.1/debian/build/sour

Re: kernel got struck while scrubbing BTRFS with node- and leafsize 32768

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 &

Re: R: Re: Subvolumes and /proc/self/mountinfo

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;

Re: kernel got struck while scrubbing BTRFS with node- and leafsize 32768

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

Re: kernel got struck while scrubbing BTRFS with node- and leafsize 32768

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-b053-2401b4f52b3e > > &g

Re: kernel got struck while scrubbing BTRFS with node- and leafsize 32768

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-b053-2401b4f52b3e > scrub started at Sat Jun 16 21:44:09 2012, running for 1341 > s

kernel got struck while scrubbing BTRFS with node- and leafsize 32768

Hi! I switched my external data harddisk to BTRFS with node- and leafsize 32768. For that I formatted it with mkfs.btrfs -l 32768 -n 32768 -L daten. This is amazon-daten. A 500 GB 2,5 inch disk connected via eSATA from ThinkPad T520 Minidock. After that I recopied the files from my backup BTRFS –

Re: Help with data recovering

Am Dienstag, 5. Juni 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Am Montag, 4. Juni 2012 schrieb Maxim Mikheev: > > --super works but my root tree 2 has many errors too. > > > > What can I do next? > > Have a data recovery company try to physically recover the bad harddisk >

Re: Help with data recovering

Am Montag, 4. Juni 2012 schrieb Maxim Mikheev: > --super works but my root tree 2 has many errors too. > > What can I do next? Have a data recovery company try to physically recover the bad harddisk to a good one and then try to mount BTRFS again and hope that your previous attempts to repair t

Re: Help with data recovering

Am Dienstag, 5. Juni 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Am Montag, 4. Juni 2012 schrieb Hugo Mills: > > On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 12:24:05PM -0400, Maxim Mikheev wrote: > > > I run through all potential tree roots. It gave me everytime > > > messages like these: > &g

Re: Help with data recovering

Am Montag, 4. Juni 2012 schrieb Hugo Mills: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 12:24:05PM -0400, Maxim Mikheev wrote: > > I run through all potential tree roots. It gave me everytime > > messages like these: > > > > parent transid verify failed on 3405159735296 wanted 9096 found 5263 > > parent transid ver

Re: SSD format/mount parameters questions

Am Freitag, 18. Mai 2012 schrieb Sander: > Martin wrote (ao): > > Are there any format/mount parameters that should be set for using > > btrfs on SSDs (other than the "ssd" mount option)? > > If possible, format the whole device, do not partition the ssd. This > will guarantee proper allignment.

Re: btrfs RAID with enterprise SATA or SAS drives

Am Freitag, 11. Mai 2012 schrieb Duncan: > Daniel Pocock posted on Wed, 09 May 2012 22:01:49 + as excerpted: > > There is various information about > > - enterprise-class drives (either SAS or just enterprise SATA) > > - the SCSI/SAS protocols themselves vs SATA having more advanced > > feature

Re: balancing metadata fails with no space left on device

Am Montag, 7. Mai 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Am Sonntag, 6. Mai 2012 schrieb Ilya Dryomov: > > On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 01:19:38PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > > Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > > > > Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2

Re: kernel 3.3.4 damages filesystem (?)

Am Mittwoch, 9. Mai 2012 schrieb Kaspar Schleiser: > Hi, > > On 05/08/2012 10:56 PM, Roman Mamedov wrote: > > Regarding btrfs, AFAIK even "btrfs -d single" suggested above works > > not "per file", but per allocation extent, so in case of one disk > > failure you will lose random *parts* (extents)

Re: kernel 3.3.4 damages filesystem (?)

Am Montag, 7. Mai 2012 schrieb Helmut Hullen: > > If you want to survive losing a single disk without the (absolute) > > fear of the whole filesystem breaking you have to have some sort of > > redundancy either by separating filesystems or using some version of > > raid other than raid0. > > No -

Re: balancing metadata fails with no space left on device

Am Sonntag, 6. Mai 2012 schrieb Ilya Dryomov: > On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 01:19:38PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > > > Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > > > > Hi! > > > >

Re: balancing metadata fails with no space left on device

Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > > Hi! > > > > merkaba:~> btrfs balance start -m / > > ERROR: error during balancing '/' - No space left on device > > There may be more info

Re: balancing metadata fails with no space left on device

Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Hi! > > merkaba:~> btrfs balance start -m / > ERROR: error during balancing '/' - No space left on device > There may be more info in syslog - try dmesg | tail > merkaba:~#19> dmesg | tail -22 > [ 62.918

balancing metadata fails with no space left on device

Hi! merkaba:~> btrfs balance start -m / ERROR: error during balancing '/' - No space left on device There may be more info in syslog - try dmesg | tail merkaba:~#19> dmesg | tail -22 [ 62.918734] CPU0: Package power limit normal [ 525.229976] btrfs: relocating block group 20422066176 flags 1 [

Re: Interpreting Output of "btrfs fi show"

Am Donnerstag, 26. April 2012 schrieb Bart Noordervliet: > On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 11:06, Thomas Rohwer wrote: > >> As for the two filesystems shown in btrfs fi show... I have no clue > >> what that is about. Did you maybe make a mistake to create a btrfs > >> filesystem on the whole disk at first

Re: Btrfs in degraded mode

Am Mittwoch, 18. April 2012 schrieb Duncan: > Shridhar Shetty posted on Tue, 17 Apr 2012 16:14:45 + as excerpted: > > I have created a btrfs filesystem with RAID1 setup having 2 disks. > > Everything works fine but when I try to umount the device and remount > > it in degraded mode, > > the dat

Re: btrfs mount flags

No cc - instead of whats habit on this list - as you prefer list replies. Am Sonntag, 15. April 2012 schrieb Duncan: > I believe there's a current report of a performance regression due to > the space cache, too, tho it's possible I'm getting this mixed up > with the inode cache. Someone with an

block rsv returned -28 and btrfs_alloc_free_block backtrace on disk full

Hi! During rsync my external data disk (BTRFS) to the backup disk (BTRFS as well) the backup volume run out of space cause I moved a directory and rsync copied the new directory before deleting the old one. rsync thus failed. But I also got: [ 41.259894] device label daten devid 1 transid

Re: btrfs mount flags

Am Freitag, 13. April 2012 schrieb Kai Krakow: > Hello! Hi! > Is there any documentation about btrfs mount flags wrt: > > 1. which flags are one-time options and are permanent, > 2. which flags are global per btrfs partition, > 3. which flags are local per subvolume mount? > > I'm asking becaus

Re: btrfs 3.2.2 -> 3.3.1 upgrade finally ate babies, some advice?

Am Montag, 9. April 2012 schrieb Daniel J Blueman: > On 9 April 2012 22:44, Leho Kraav wrote: > > On 09.04.2012 17:35, Daniel J Blueman wrote: > >> Leho Kraav kraav.com> writes: > >> [] > >> > >>> Apr 8 02:46:11 s9 kernel: [ 189.691778] attempt to access beyond > >>> end of device > >>> Apr

Re: "Invalid argument" when mounting a btrfs raid1 filesystem

Am Montag, 26. März 2012 schrieb Calvin Walton: > On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 10:51 +0200, Karel Zak wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 06:21:05PM +, Hugo Mills wrote: > > >As Sadner says, you have to run "btrfs dev scan" before you try > > >to > > > > > > mount the FS. If you have root on b

Re: scrub to delete files

Am Samstag, 24. März 2012 schrieb Lubos Kolouch: > Hello, Hi Lubos, > I have a (rather historical btrfs) filesystem running here. > When I run scrub, I get a lot of messages like : > btrfs: checksum error at logical 2153033760768 on dev /dev/md2, sector > 492918400, root 5232, inode 3360637, offs

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: mkfs: allow not to trim a device

Hi David, Am Samstag, 17. März 2012 schrieb David Sterba: […] > + fprintf(stderr, "\t -T --nodiscard do not perform whole device > TRIM\n"); fprintf(stderr, "%s\n", BTRFS_BUILD_VERSION); Just curious: Whats the use case for this? Thanks, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll

Re: "scrub" stops the machine

Am Montag, 19. März 2012 schrieb Chris Samuel: > On Monday 19 March 2012 19:22:58 Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Maybe 3.2.10 oder 3.2.11 contains some related fixes? > > I don't believe that any btrfs fixes get pushed to the stable releases > (at least, not yet), you

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Montag, 19. März 2012 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 09:31:24AM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > > > > > > > > This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the > > > stable kernel tree. Please read Document

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Sonntag, 18. März 2012 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: > On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 10:43:25AM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Hi Greg, Chris, Arne, hi everyone, > > > > Am Freitag, 16. März 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > > > Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 schri

Re: "scrub" stops the machine

Am Samstag, 17. März 2012 schrieb Helmut Hullen: > Du meintest am 17.03.12: > btrfs scrub start /mnt/btr > > and all was dead. Really dead. No access via keybord, no access > via SSH. > > Kernel 3.2.9 > > [...] > > > Please review the thread I started with subject:

Re: "scrub" stops the machine

Am Samstag, 17. März 2012 schrieb Helmut Hullen: > Hallo, Arne, Hi Helmut, Arne, Chris, hi everyone, > Du meintest am 17.03.12 zum Thema Re: "scrub" stops the machine: > > On 03/17/12 17:35, Helmut Hullen wrote: > >> btrfs scrub start /mnt/btr > >> > >> and all was dead. Really dead. No

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Hi Greg, Chris, Arne, hi everyone, Am Freitag, 16. März 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 schrieb Chris Mason: > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 06:32:19PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > > Am Samstag, 25. Februar 2012 schrieb Arne Jansen: > &g

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 schrieb Chris Mason: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 06:32:19PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Am Samstag, 25. Februar 2012 schrieb Arne Jansen: > > > On 02/24/12 16:51, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > > > Am Samstag, 21. Januar 2

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 schrieb Chris Mason: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 06:32:19PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Am Samstag, 25. Februar 2012 schrieb Arne Jansen: > > > On 02/24/12 16:51, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > > > Am Samstag, 21. Januar 2

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > [20880.564225] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" > disables this message. [20880.564234] btrfs D > 12d2 0 3348 1 0x [20880.564251] c0b72080 > 0086 2cae1a17 0

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Samstag, 25. Februar 2012 schrieb Arne Jansen: > On 02/24/12 16:51, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Am Samstag, 21. Januar 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > >> Am Samstag, 21. Januar 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > >>> I still have this with 3.2.0-1-pae -

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Samstag, 25. Februar 2012 schrieb Arne Jansen: > Hi Martin, > > I just sent 2 patches to the list. Could you please test if these > fix your problem with scrub? I saved them and I try to. But no promises as to when. The machine is slow at compiling kernels. And there are two annoying Pulseaud

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Samstag, 21. Januar 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Am Samstag, 21. Januar 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > > I still have this with 3.2.0-1-pae - which is a debian kernel based > > on 3.2.1. > > > > When I do btrfs scrub start / the machine locks immedia

Re: brtfs on top of dmcrypt with SSD. No corruption iff write cache off?

Am Samstag, 18. Februar 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: […] > Am Montag, 13. Februar 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN: > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:47:54AM +0100, Milan Broz wrote: > > > On 02/12/2012 11:32 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote: > > > >Actually I had one more question. &

Re: brtfs on top of dmcrypt with SSD. No corruption iff write cache off?

Sorry, I forget to keep Cc´s, different lists, different habits. To Milan Broz: Well now I noticed that you linked to your own blog entry. Please do not take my below statements personally - I might have written them a bit harshly. Actually I do not really know whether your statement that TRIM

Re: brtfs on top of dmcrypt with SSD. No corruption iff write cache off?

Am Montag, 13. Februar 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN: > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:47:54AM +0100, Milan Broz wrote: > > On 02/12/2012 11:32 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote: > > >Actually I had one more question. > > > > > >I read this page: > > >http://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2011-July/msg00042.html > >

Re: btrfs support for efficient SSD operation (data blocks alignment)

Hi Martin, Am Mittwoch, 8. Februar 2012 schrieb Martin: > My understanding is that for x86 architecture systems, btrfs only > allows a sector size of 4kB for a HDD/SSD. That is fine for the > present HDDs assuming the partitions are aligned to a 4kB boundary for > that device. > > However for SSD

Re: btrfs-raid questions I couldn't find an answer to on the wiki

Am Sonntag, 29. Januar 2012 schrieb Duncan: > Martin Steigerwald posted on Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:08:52 +0100 as excerpted: > > Am Donnerstag, 26. Januar 2012 schrieb Duncan: […] > >> 2) The wiki indicates that btrfs-raid1 and raid-10 only mirror data > >> 2- way,

Re: [PATCH 3/3] filemap: don't call generic_write_sync for -EIOCBQUEUED

Adding linux-btrfs to Cc. Am Freitag, 27. Januar 2012 schrieb Jeff Moyer: > Hi, Hi, > As it stands, generic_file_aio_write will call into generic_write_sync > when -EIOCBQUEUED is returned from __generic_file_aio_write. > EIOCBQUEUED indicates that an I/O was submitted but NOT completed. > Th

Re: btrfs-raid questions I couldn't find an answer to on the wiki

Am Donnerstag, 26. Januar 2012 schrieb Duncan: > I'm currently researching an upgrade to (raid1-ed) btrfs from mostly > reiserfs (which I've found quite reliable (even thru a period of bad > ram and resulting system crashes) since data=ordered went in with > 2.6.16 or whatever it was. (Thanks, Chr

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Dienstag, 24. Januar 2012 schrieb Arne Jansen: > On 24.01.2012 11:16, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Am Dienstag, 24. Januar 2012 schrieb Arne Jansen: > >> On 21.01.2012 11:49, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > >>> Am Dienstag, 20. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Dienstag, 24. Januar 2012 schrieb Arne Jansen: > On 21.01.2012 11:49, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Am Dienstag, 20. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > > > > When I do btrfs scrub start / the machine locks immediately up hard. > > Can you please give me the

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Samstag, 21. Januar 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > I still have this with 3.2.0-1-pae - which is a debian kernel based on > 3.2.1. > > When I do btrfs scrub start / the machine locks immediately up hard. > > Then usually on next boot it stops on space_cache enabled

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Dienstag, 20. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Hi again! […] > Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > > Hi! > > > > Finally I tried scrubbing the / BTRFS filesystem mentioned in the > > thread "speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Re: Why does Btrfs allow raid1 with mismatched drives? Also: How to look behind the curtain

Sorry, accidentally dropped CC. Am Donnerstag, 5. Januar 2012 schrieb Fabian Zeindl: > On Jan 5, 2012, at 14:35 , Roman Kapusta wrote: > > you have still 4GB free of non RAID-1 (single) space, which is > > currently unavailable, but it is planned that BTRFS will support > > mixed storage: > > some

Re: Why does Btrfs allow raid1 with mismatched drives? Also: How to look behind the curtain

Am Donnerstag, 5. Januar 2012 schrieb Fabian Zeindl: > On Jan 5, 2012, at 14:35 , Roman Kapusta wrote: > > you have still 4GB free of non RAID-1 (single) space, which is > > currently unavailable, but it is planned that BTRFS will support > > mixed storage: > > some files can be RAID-1, some files

Re: Why does Btrfs allow raid1 with mismatched drives? Also: How to look behind the curtain

Am Donnerstag, 5. Januar 2012 schrieb Fabian Zeindl: > On Jan 5, 2012, at 11:39 , Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > "Allocating as many chunks as can fit across the drives" is also > > pretty clear to me. So if BTRFS can´t allocate a new chunk on two > > devices, its fu

Re: Why does Btrfs allow raid1 with mismatched drives? Also: How to look behind the curtain

Am Donnerstag, 5. Januar 2012 schrieb Fabian Zeindl: > On Thursday, January 5, 2012 at 10:44 , Hugo Mills wrote: > > You should probably read the mis-named "Sysadmin's Guide" > > on the wiki[1], which explains what btrfs actually does with its > > replication. > > > > You should also probably read

Re: fstrim on BTRFS

Am Donnerstag, 29. Dezember 2011 schrieb Li Zefan: > Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Hi! > > > > With 3.2-rc4 (probably earlier), Ext4 seems to remember what areas it > > trimmed: > > > > merkaba:~> fstrim -v /boot > > /boot: 224657408 bytes were tri

fstrim on BTRFS

Hi! With 3.2-rc4 (probably earlier), Ext4 seems to remember what areas it trimmed: merkaba:~> fstrim -v /boot /boot: 224657408 bytes were trimmed merkaba:~> fstrim -v /boot /boot: 0 bytes were trimmed But BTRFS does not: merkaba:~> fstrim -v / /: 4431613952 bytes were trimmed merkaba:~> fstri

Re: FS won't mount, open_ctree failed, Assertion !(path->slots[0] == 0) failed

Am Montag, 26. Dezember 2011 schrieb Evan LeCompte: > On 12/23/2011 06:15 PM, Chris Mason wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 09:37:28AM +, Evan LeCompte wrote: > >> I'm having the very same issue as you. I've tried all the latest > >> btrfs tools, btrfsck, btrfs-zero-log, restore, find-root etc

Re: FS won't mount, open_ctree failed, Assertion !(path->slots[0] == 0) failed

Am Montag, 26. Dezember 2011 schrieb Evan LeCompte: > On 12/23/2011 06:15 PM, Chris Mason wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 09:37:28AM +, Evan LeCompte wrote: > >> I'm having the very same issue as you. I've tried all the latest > >> btrfs tools, btrfsck, btrfs-zero-log, restore, find-root etc

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Martin Steigerwald: > Hi! > > Finally I tried scrubbing the / BTRFS filesystem mentioned in the > thread "speeding up slow btrfs filesystem". However the machine looks > up hard then. It repeats the last few seconds of audio all over again, > no mouse and no ssh connec

Re: 3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Hi! > > Finally I tried scrubbing the / BTRFS filesystem mentioned in the > thread "speeding up slow btrfs filesystem". However the machine looks > up hard then. It repeats the last few seconds of audio all over

3.2-rc4: scrubbing locks up the kernel, then hung tasks on boot

Hi! Finally I tried scrubbing the / BTRFS filesystem mentioned in the thread "speeding up slow btrfs filesystem". However the machine looks up hard then. It repeats the last few seconds of audio all over again, no mouse and no ssh connection anymore: deepdance:~> btrfs scrub start / scrub sta

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Hugo Mills: > > I might still be doing the balance for that optical viewing pleasure > > ;). > >:) > >It can't hurt, and with such a small FS it probably won't take > long. Now I first did a defrag and then a balance. The balance was heavier I had m

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb David McBride: > On Sat, 2011-12-17 at 13:00 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > BTW on my ThinkPad T520 I do not perceive performance issues for > > BTRFS as /. But then thats located on an Intel SSD 320 where seeks > > should not m

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli: > > Adding new possibilities is one thing. And supporting snapshots > > properly would depend on some support side from the applications. I > > think that using snapshots for upgrades is a good idea. > > > > > > > > But OTOH I think that B

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > If BTRFS has other means to guarantee filesystem consistency that is > faster it might still make fsync() a no-op or just creating a > snapshot temporarily automatically. To clear this up: It should only make it a no-op if it g

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Chris Samuel: > On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 04:51:51 AM Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Currently I have: > > > > deepdance:~> cat /proc/version > > Linux version 3.0.0-2-686-pae (Debian 3.0.0-6) > > You are using a fairly old kerne

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Hugo Mills: > > >The metadata trees are automatically balanced, simply by the > > >nature > > > > > > of the B-tree algorithms used. Balance won't, in general, affect > > > them. The only thing that a balance will achieve on a single-disk > > > filesystem i

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieben Sie: > On Friday, 16 December, 2011 20:53:58 Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > > I found a solution, but requires a bit of setup. > > > > > > > > > > > > The idea is to avoid do perform sync during the package

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Hugo Mills: > On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:09:56PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > I think I will scrub / balance / defragment the filesystem after a > > backup. But I am not sure in what order. > > > > I understand that defrag

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Sergei Trofimovich: > On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 21:58:45 +0100 > > Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Nope. Doesn´t seem to help much. > > > > How to turn it off, after turning it on? > > > > deepdance:~> LANG=C mount -o

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > I wonder whether it might be a good idea to have nodatacow for /: Nope. Doesn´t seem to help much. How to turn it off, after turning it on? deepdance:~> LANG=C mount -o remount,datacow / mount: / not mounted already, or bad

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli: > On Friday, 16 December, 2011 18:54:46 you wrote: > > Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > > > Its not critical for me to fix these issues (soon), but I am > > > curious whether its pos

Re: speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > Its not critical for me to fix these issues (soon), but I am curious > whether its possible to get the filesystem speedier by some > maintenance. Maybe after it is clear why it is so slow in the first place ;). -- Marti

speeding up slow btrfs filesystem

Hi! On apt-get dist-upgrading my Amarok ThinkPad T23 with BTRFS as / and as /home I get extremely slow operation - my ThinkPad T42 with Ext4 is running circles around it and thats likely not only due to the faster CPU. vmstat 1 shows: procs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io -syst

Re: BTRFS and power loss ~= corruption?

Hi Maciej, Am Freitag, 26. August 2011 schrieb Maciej Marcin Piechotka: > On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 19:55 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > That said I also do not have any issues with BTRFS on a ThinkPad T23 > > for / > > and /home. But then the machine has an hiberna

Re: How to remount btrfs without compression?

Am Montag, 7. November 2011 schrieb dima: > Hello, Hi Dima, > Is there any possibility to remount a compressed btrfs without any > compression at all? > > Syslinux bootloader does not understand any btrfs compression and > whenever I edit syslinux.cfg on my compressed / subvolume, the file > be

Re: space cache generation (...) does not match inode (...)

Hi Josef, Am Montag, 8. August 2011 schrieb Josef Bacik: > On 08/06/2011 10:16 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > > I've always gotten space cache generation warnings, but some time > > after 3.0 they started going nuts. I get: > > > > space cache generation (14667727114112179905) does not match ino

Re: read error: how to fix?

Hi Helmut, Am Montag, 10. Oktober 2011 schrieb Helmut Hullen: > > The thing is that marking sectors bad is a > > (pretty poor) band-aid for a much bigger problem: If you're hitting > > persistent read errors and re-writing the blocks doesn't fix it, your > > disk is already close to being complete

Re: Honest timeline for btrfsck

Am Mittwoch, 12. Oktober 2011 schrieb Jeff Putney: > > I do not argue that having a nice fsck sooner than later is fine, but > > I question the usefulness of repeating reminders. Chris Mason and > > other developers possibly working on the fsck should know by now, > > that you want it. So its unlik

Re: Number of hard links limit

Hello, Am Freitag, 6. August 2010 schrieb Chris Mason: > On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 02:30:39PM +0300, Sami Liedes wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 12:22:14AM +0200, Oystein Viggen wrote: > > > IIRC, the limit on hard links is per directory. That is, if you > > > put each hard link into its own dir

Re: Honest timeline for btrfsck

Am Freitag, 7. Oktober 2011 schrieb Gour-Gadadhara Dasa: > On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 08:39:36 -0700 > > Mike wrote: > > I also don't think you are giving people enough credit. e2fsck will > > cause corruption pretty much everytime its run on a mounted file > > system, but a nice big nasty warning messa

Re: graceful handling of removing a plugable storage device that is being written to

Am Sonntag, 11. September 2011 schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven: > On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 18:53, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Frankly, I never tried this on AmigaOS. I know that AmigaOS expects > > the exact same floppy disk to be inserted again. Only the same name > > isn´t

Re: graceful handling of removing a plugable storage device that is being written to

Am Sonntag, 11. September 2011 schrieb Hin-Tak Leung: > --- On Sun, 11/9/11, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Cc to BTRFS mailinglist as it > > triggered the idea of mine again. > > > > > > Hi! > > > > Today I did it again and removed a BTRFS partiti

graceful handling of removing a plugable storage device that is being written to

Cc to BTRFS mailinglist as it triggered the idea of mine again. Hi! Today I did it again and removed a BTRFS partition that is written too. That BTRFS as of Kernel 3.0.3 (debian package) does not like very much. I think thats a known issue and I wrote a mail to BTRFS mailing list about it. I

btrfs crashes after removing drive that is written to and failed mount until btrfs-zero-log afterwards

Hi! Has a developer fixed this issue in the meanwhile? I did it just again today. I overlooked Dolphin´s "device is busy" message and unplugged it again. I had to reboot, a mount attempt failed, I had to reboot another time, after btrfs-zero-log it worked. I have traces available but I think t

Re: Honest timeline for btrfsck

Am Donnerstag, 1. September 2011 schrieb Hugo Mills: > On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 03:24:28PM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > On 09/01/2011 03:20 PM, Hugo Mills wrote: > > >You may have missed the "on vacation" bit. > > > > I did read the "on vacation" bit. Not that it is any of my business,

Re: BTRFS and power loss ~= corruption?

Am Donnerstag, 25. August 2011 schrieb Anand Jain: > anyways, solutions containing disk-write-cache disabled and SSD > is quite popular now a days. And in terms of random synchronous > write performance they are awesome. There are SSD with capacitors such as Intel SSD 320. These according to

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   >