Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-16 01:45, Chris Murphy wrote: On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:23 AM, Tom Worster wrote: On 13 Jan 2018, at 17:09, Chris Murphy wrote: On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: To that end, I propose the following text for

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: ... >> >> Unless some better fix is in the works, this _should_ be a systemd unit or >> something. Until then, please put it in FAQ. > > At least openSUSE has a systemd unit for a long time now, but last > time I

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:23 AM, Tom Worster wrote: > On 13 Jan 2018, at 17:09, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn >> wrote: >> >> >>> To that end, I propose the following text for the FAQ: >>> >>> Q: Do I need

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 13 Jan 2018, at 17:09, Chris Murphy wrote: On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: To that end, I propose the following text for the FAQ: Q: Do I need to run a balance regularly? A: While not strictly necessary for normal operations, running

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-13 17:09, Chris Murphy wrote: On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: To that end, I propose the following text for the FAQ: Q: Do I need to run a balance regularly? A: While not strictly necessary for normal operations, running a

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > To that end, I propose the following text for the FAQ: > > Q: Do I need to run a balance regularly? > > A: While not strictly necessary for normal operations, running a filtered > balance regularly can help

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-12 14:26, Tom Worster wrote: On 12 Jan 2018, at 13:24, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: OK, I've gotten a lot of good feedback on this, and the general consensus seems to be: * If we're going to recommend regular balance, we should explain how it actually helps things. * We should

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 12 Jan 2018, at 13:24, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: OK, I've gotten a lot of good feedback on this, and the general consensus seems to be: * If we're going to recommend regular balance, we should explain how it actually helps things. * We should mention the performance interactions with

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-08 10:55, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: So, for a while now I've been recommending small filtered balances to people as part of regular maintenance for BTRFS filesystems under the logic that it does help in some cases and can't really hurt (and if done right, is really inexpensive in

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 01/10/2018 05:38 AM, Duncan wrote: > [...] > > And I've definitely noticed an effect since the ssd option stopped using > the 2 MiB spreading algorithm in 4.14. Glad to hear. :-) > In particular, while chunk usage > was generally stable before that and I only occasionally needed to run >

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 01/10/2018 10:37 PM, waxhead wrote: > As just a regular user I would think that the first thing you would need > is an analyze that can tell you if it is a good idea to balance or not > in the first place. Tooling to create that is available. Btrfs allows you to read a lot of different data to

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-10 15:44, Timofey Titovets wrote: 2018-01-10 21:33 GMT+03:00 Tom Worster : On 10 Jan 2018, at 12:01, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: On 2018-01-10 11:30, Tom Worster wrote: Also, for future reference, the term we typically use is ENOSPC, as that's the symbolic name

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-10 16:37, waxhead wrote: Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: So, for a while now I've been recommending small filtered balances to people as part of regular maintenance for BTRFS filesystems under the logic that it does help in some cases and can't really hurt (and if done right, is really

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

Austin S. Hemmelgarn posted on Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:01:42 -0500 as excerpted: >> - Some experienced users say that, to resolve a problem with DoUS, they >> would rather recreate the filesystem than run balance. > This is kind of independent of BTRFS. A lot of seasoned system > administrators are

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: So, for a while now I've been recommending small filtered balances to people as part of regular maintenance for BTRFS filesystems under the logic that it does help in some cases and can't really hurt (and if done right, is really inexpensive in terms of resources).

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

2018-01-10 21:33 GMT+03:00 Tom Worster : > On 10 Jan 2018, at 12:01, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > >> On 2018-01-10 11:30, Tom Worster wrote: >> >> Also, for future reference, the term we typically use is ENOSPC, as that's >> the symbolic name for the error code you get when this

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 10 Jan 2018, at 12:01, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: On 2018-01-10 11:30, Tom Worster wrote: Also, for future reference, the term we typically use is ENOSPC, as that's the symbolic name for the error code you get when this happens (or when your filesystem is just normally full), but I

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-10 11:30, Tom Worster wrote: On 9 Jan 2018, at 22:49, Duncan wrote: AFAIK, such corruption reports re balance aren't really balance, per se, at all. Instead, what I've seen in nearly all cases is a number of filesystem maintenance commands involving heavy I/O colliding, that is,

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 9 Jan 2018, at 22:49, Duncan wrote: AFAIK, such corruption reports re balance aren't really balance, per se, at all. Instead, what I've seen in nearly all cases is a number of filesystem maintenance commands involving heavy I/O colliding, that is, being run at the same time I hope

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

Austin S. Hemmelgarn posted on Tue, 09 Jan 2018 07:46:48 -0500 as excerpted: >> On 08/01/18 23:29, Martin Raiber wrote: >>> There have been reports of (rare) corruption caused by balance (won't >>> be detected by a scrub) here on the mailing list. So I would stay a >>> away from btrfs balance

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 9 Jan 2018, at 7:23, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: On 2018-01-08 16:43, Tom Worster wrote: Given the documentation and the usage stats, I did not know what options to use with balance. I spent some time reading and researching and trying to understand the filters and how they should

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-09 03:33, Marat Khalili wrote: On 08/01/18 19:34, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: A: While not strictly necessary, running regular filtered balances (for example `btrfs balance start -dusage=50 -dlimit=2 -musage=50 -mlimit=4`, see `man btrfs-balance` for more info on what the options

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-08 16:43, Tom Worster wrote: On 01/08/2018 04:55 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: On 2018-01-08 11:20, ein wrote: > On 01/08/2018 04:55 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > > > [...] > > > > And here's the FAQ entry: > > > > Q: Do I need to run a balance regularly? > > > > A: In

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 08/01/18 19:34, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: A: While not strictly necessary, running regular filtered balances (for example `btrfs balance start -dusage=50 -dlimit=2 -musage=50 -mlimit=4`, see `man btrfs-balance` for more info on what the options mean) can help keep a volume healthy by

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 04:43:02PM -0500, Tom Worster wrote: > On 01/08/2018 04:55 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > > >On 2018-01-08 11:20, ein wrote: > > > >> On 01/08/2018 04:55 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > >> > >> > [...] > >> > > >> > And here's the FAQ entry: > >> > > >> > Q: Do I need

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 01/08/2018 04:55 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: On 2018-01-08 11:20, ein wrote: > On 01/08/2018 04:55 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > > > [...] > > > > And here's the FAQ entry: > > > > Q: Do I need to run a balance regularly? > > > > A: In general usage, no. A full unfiltered balance

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 08.01.2018 19:34 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > On 2018-01-08 13:17, Graham Cobb wrote: >> On 08/01/18 16:34, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: >>> Ideally, I think it should be as generic as reasonably possible, >>> possibly something along the lines of: >>> >>> A: While not strictly necessary,

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-08 13:17, Graham Cobb wrote: On 08/01/18 16:34, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: Ideally, I think it should be as generic as reasonably possible, possibly something along the lines of: A: While not strictly necessary, running regular filtered balances (for example `btrfs balance start

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 08/01/18 16:34, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > Ideally, I think it should be as generic as reasonably possible, > possibly something along the lines of: > > A: While not strictly necessary, running regular filtered balances (for > example `btrfs balance start -dusage=50 -dlimit=2 -musage=50

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 2018-01-08 11:20, ein wrote: On 01/08/2018 04:55 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: [...] And here's the FAQ entry: Q: Do I need to run a balance regularly? A: In general usage, no. A full unfiltered balance typically takes a long time, and will rewrite huge amounts of data unnecessarily.

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 01/08/2018 04:55 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > [...] > > And here's the FAQ entry: > > Q: Do I need to run a balance regularly? > > A: In general usage, no. A full unfiltered balance typically takes a > long time, and will rewrite huge amounts of data unnecessarily. You may > wish to run

Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

So, for a while now I've been recommending small filtered balances to people as part of regular maintenance for BTRFS filesystems under the logic that it does help in some cases and can't really hurt (and if done right, is really inexpensive in terms of resources). This ended up integrated