Re: btrfs raid assurance

And btw, my current disk conf is a 1x 500GB, 2x3TB and a 5TB. 2017-07-25 10:51 GMT-03:00 Hugo Mills : > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 01:46:56PM +, Hugo Mills wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 09:55:37AM -0300, Hérikz Nawarro wrote: >> > Hello everyone, >> > >> > I'm migrating

[PATCH] btrfs: Make flush_space return void

The return value of flush_space was used to have significance in the early days when the code was first introduced and before the ticketed enospc rework. Since the latter got introduced the return value lost any significance whatsoever to its callers. So let's remove it. While at it also remove

[PATCH] btrfs: Deprecate userspace transaction ioctls

Userspace transactions were introduced in commit 6bf13c0cc833 ("Btrfs: transaction ioctls") to provide semantics that Ceph's object store required. However, things have changed significantly since then, to the point where btrfs is no longer suitable as a backend for ceph and in fact it's actively

Re: btrfs raid assurance

Thanks everyone, I'll stick with raid 1. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

btrfs raid assurance

Hello everyone, I'm migrating to btrfs and i would like to know, in a btrfs filesystem with 4 disks (multiple sizes) with -d raid0 & -m raid1, how many drives can i lost without losing the entire array? Cheers. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body

Re: btrfs raid assurance

On 2017-07-25 08:55, Hérikz Nawarro wrote: Hello everyone, I'm migrating to btrfs and i would like to know, in a btrfs filesystem with 4 disks (multiple sizes) with -d raid0 & -m raid1, how many drives can i lost without losing the entire array? Exactly one, but you will lose data if you lose

Re: btrfs raid assurance

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 09:55:37AM -0300, Hérikz Nawarro wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I'm migrating to btrfs and i would like to know, in a btrfs filesystem > with 4 disks (multiple sizes) with -d raid0 & -m raid1, how many > drives can i lost without losing the entire array? You can lose one

Re: btrfs raid assurance

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 01:46:56PM +, Hugo Mills wrote: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 09:55:37AM -0300, Hérikz Nawarro wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > I'm migrating to btrfs and i would like to know, in a btrfs filesystem > > with 4 disks (multiple sizes) with -d raid0 & -m raid1, how many > >

Re: btrfs raid assurance

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:55:18AM -0300, Hérikz Nawarro wrote: > And btw, my current disk conf is a 1x 500GB, 2x3TB and a 5TB. OK, so by my mental arithmetic(*), you'd get: - 9.5 TB usable in RAID-0 - 11.5 TB usable in single mode - 5.75 TB usable in RAID-1 Hugo. (*) Which may be

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Deprecate userspace transaction ioctls

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 04:12:58PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > Userspace transactions were introduced in commit > 6bf13c0cc833 ("Btrfs: transaction ioctls") to provide semantics that Ceph's > object store required. However, things have changed significantly since then, > to the point where

Re: Best Practice: Add new device to RAID1 pool

Am Montag, den 24.07.2017, 20:42 + schrieb Hugo Mills: > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 02:35:05PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Cloud Admin > r.eu> wrote: > > > > > I am a little bit confused because the balance command is running > > >

Re: Best Practice: Add new device to RAID1 pool

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 8:22 PM, Marat Khalili wrote: >>> This may be a stupid question , but are your pool of butter (or BTRFS pool) >>> by any chance hooked up via USB? If this is USB2.0 at 480mitb/s then it is >>> about 57MB/s / 4 drives = roughly 14.25 or about 11MB/s if you

[PATCH 4.12 031/196] btrfs: Dont clear SGID when inheriting ACLs

4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. -- From: Jan Kara commit b7f8a09f8097db776b8d160862540e4fc1f51296 upstream. When new directory 'DIR1' is created in a directory 'DIR0' with SGID bit set, DIR1 is expected to have SGID

[PATCH 3/3] btrfs-progs: convert: add support for converting reiserfs

From: Jeff Mahoney This patch adds support to convert reiserfs file systems in-place to btrfs. It will convert extended attribute files to btrfs extended attributes, translate ACLs, coalesce tails that consist of multiple items into one item, and convert tails that are too big

[PATCH 2/3] btrfs-progs: convert: add missing newlines for printfs

From: Jeff Mahoney There are two printfs with missing newlines that end up making the output wonky. Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney --- convert/main.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/convert/main.c b/convert/main.c index

[PATCH 1/3] btrfs-progs: convert: properly handle reserved ranges while iterating files

From: Jeff Mahoney Commit 522ef705e38 (btrfs-progs: convert: Introduce function to calculate the available space) changed how we handle migrating file data so that we never have btrfs space associated with the reserved ranges. This works pretty well and when we iterate over the

Re: btrfs raid assurance

Hugo Mills wrote: You can see about the disk usage in different scenarios with the online tool at: http://carfax.org.uk/btrfs-usage/ Hugo. As a side note, have you ever considered making this online tool (that should never go away just for the record) part of btrfs-progs e.g. a

[PATCH 4.9 028/125] btrfs: Dont clear SGID when inheriting ACLs

4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. -- From: Jan Kara commit b7f8a09f8097db776b8d160862540e4fc1f51296 upstream. When new directory 'DIR1' is created in a directory 'DIR0' with SGID bit set, DIR1 is expected to have SGID bit

[PATCH] btrfs-progs: quota: Add -W option to rescan to wait without starting rescan

From: Jeff Mahoney This patch adds a new -W option to wait for a rescan without starting a new operation. This is useful for things like xfstests where we want do to do a "btrfs quota enable" and not continue until the subsequent rescan has finished. In addition to documenting

[PATCH 1/7] btrfs-progs: check: supplement extent backref list with rbtree

From: Jeff Mahoney For the pathlogical case, like xfstests generic/297 that creates a large file consisting of one, repeating reflinked extent, fsck can take hours. The root cause is that calling find_data_backref while iterating the extent records is an O(n^2) algorithm. For

[PATCH 7/7] btrfs-progs: backref: use separate list for indirect refs

From: Jeff Mahoney Rather than iterate over all outstanding backrefs to resolve indirect refs, use a separate list that only contains indirect refs. When we process missing keys, the ref moves to the indirect ref list. Once the indirect ref is resolved, move the ref to the

[PATCH 3/7] btrfs-progs: extent-cache: actually cache extent buffers

From: Jeff Mahoney We have the infrastructure to cache extent buffers but we don't actually do the caching. As soon as the last reference is dropped, the buffer is dropped. This patch keeps the extent buffers around until the max cache size is reached (defaults to 25% of

[PATCH 4/7] btrfs-progs: backref: push state tracking into a helper structure

From: Jeff Mahoney Eventually, we'll have several lists and trees, as well as some statistics. Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney --- backref.c | 75 ++- 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)

[PATCH 2/7] btrfs-progs: check: switch to iterating over the backref_tree

From: Jeff Mahoney We now have two data structures that can be used to iterate the same data set, and there may be quite a few of them in memory. Eliminating the list_head member will reduce memory consumption while iterating over the extent backrefs. Signed-off-by: Jeff

[PATCH 5/7] btrfs-progs: backref: add list_first_pref helper

From: Jeff Mahoney --- backref.c | 11 +++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/backref.c b/backref.c index ac1b506..be3376a 100644 --- a/backref.c +++ b/backref.c @@ -130,6 +130,11 @@ struct __prelim_ref { u64 wanted_disk_byte; };

[PATCH 6/7] btrfs-progs: backref: use separate list for missing keys

From: Jeff Mahoney Rather than iterate over all outstanding backrefs to resolve missing keys, use a separate list that only contains refs that need missing keys resolved. Once the missing key is resolved, move the ref to the pending list. Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney

Re: [PATCH 3/3] btrfs-progs: convert: add support for converting reiserfs

On 7/25/17 4:54 PM, je...@suse.com wrote: > From: Jeff Mahoney > > This patch adds support to convert reiserfs file systems in-place to btrfs. > > It will convert extended attribute files to btrfs extended attributes, > translate ACLs, coalesce tails that consist of multiple

Re: btrfs raid assurance

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 11:29:13PM +0200, waxhead wrote: > > > Hugo Mills wrote: > > > >>>You can see about the disk usage in different scenarios with the > >>>online tool at: > >>> > >>>http://carfax.org.uk/btrfs-usage/ > >>> > >>>Hugo. > >>> > As a side note, have you ever considered

Re: Best Practice: Add new device to RAID1 pool

Am Montag, den 24.07.2017, 23:12 +0200 schrieb waxhead: > > Chris Murphy wrote: > > This may be a stupid question , but are your pool of butter (or > BTRFS  > pool) by any chance hooked up via USB? If this is USB2.0 at No, it is a SATA array with (currently) four 8TB discs. -- To unsubscribe

Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] btrfs: Add zstd support

Hi Nick, On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:27:42PM +0100, Nick Terrell wrote: > Add zstd compression and decompression support to BtrFS. zstd at its > fastest level compresses almost as well as zlib, while offering much > faster compression and decompression, approaching lzo speeds. Can we look at