Hi All,
Long story short: We've found that operations on a directory structure
holding many dirs takes ages on ext4.
The Question: Why there's that huge difference in ext4 and btrfs? See
below test results for real values.
Background: I had to backup a Jenkins directory holding workspace for
Hi All,
/*Sorry for sending incomplete email, hit wrong button :) */
Long story short: We've found that operations on a directory structure
holding many dirs takes ages on ext4.
The Question: Why there's that huge difference in ext4 and btrfs? See
below test results for real values.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 02:31:03PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
Hi All,
Long story short: We've found that operations on a directory structure
holding many dirs takes ages on ext4.
The Question: Why there's that huge difference in ext4 and btrfs? See
below test results for real values.
Hi All,
/*Sorry for sending incomplete email, hit wrong button :) I guess I
can't use Gmail */
Long story short: We've found that operations on a directory structure
holding many dirs takes ages on ext4.
The Question: Why there's that huge difference in ext4 and btrfs? See
below test results
Hi Chris,
the last one was borked :) Please check this one.
-jacek
2012/2/29 Jacek Luczak difrost.ker...@gmail.com:
Hi All,
/*Sorry for sending incomplete email, hit wrong button :) I guess I
can't use Gmail */
Long story short: We've found that operations on a directory structure
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 09:36:35PM -0600, Travis Shivers wrote:
I upgraded my kernel so my version is now:
Linux server 3.3.0-030300rc5-generic #201202251535 SMP Sat Feb 25
20:36:29 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
The problem has not been solved and I still get the previous errors.
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Chris Mason wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 02:31:03PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
Hi All,
Long story short: We've found that operations on a directory structure
holding many dirs takes ages on ext4.
The Question: Why there's that huge difference in ext4 and
2012/2/29 Jacek Luczak difrost.ker...@gmail.com:
Hi Chris,
the last one was borked :) Please check this one.
-jacek
2012/2/29 Jacek Luczak difrost.ker...@gmail.com:
Hi All,
/*Sorry for sending incomplete email, hit wrong button :) I guess I
can't use Gmail */
Long story short: We've
2012/2/29 Jacek Luczak difrost.ker...@gmail.com:
2012/2/29 Jacek Luczak difrost.ker...@gmail.com:
Hi Chris,
the last one was borked :) Please check this one.
-jacek
2012/2/29 Jacek Luczak difrost.ker...@gmail.com:
Hi All,
/*Sorry for sending incomplete email, hit wrong button :) I guess
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 08:51:58AM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 02:31:03PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
Ext4 results:
| Type | 2.6.39.4-3 | 3.2.7
| Dir cnt | 17m 40sec | 11m 20sec
| File cnt | 17m 36sec | 11m 22sec
| Copy| 1h 28m| 1h 27m
|
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 03:07:45PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
[ btrfs faster than ext for find and cp -a ]
2012/2/29 Jacek Luczak difrost.ker...@gmail.com:
I will try to answer the question from the broken email I've sent.
@Lukas, it was always a fresh FS on top of LVM logical volume.
2012/2/29 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 03:07:45PM +0100, Jacek Luczak wrote:
[ btrfs faster than ext for find and cp -a ]
2012/2/29 Jacek Luczak difrost.ker...@gmail.com:
I will try to answer the question from the broken email I've sent.
@Lukas, it was
Actually it is possible. Check out David's response to my question from
some time ago:
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/14227
this was a quick aid, please see attached file for an updated tool to set
the file flags, now added 'z' for NOCOMPRESS flag, and supports
I get the following errors when running fileflags on large (2GB) database
files:
open(): No such file or directory
open(): Value too large for defined data type
http://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/faq/#Value-too-large-for-defined-data-type
The message Value too large for defined data
This has been causing a lot of confusion for quite a while now and a lot
of users were surprised by this (some of them were even stuck in a
ENOSPC situation which they couldn't easily get out of). The addition
of restriper gives users a clear choice between raid0 and drive concat
setup so there's
Here is the output from the commands:
# ./btrfs-debug-tree -R /dev/sdh
failed to read /dev/sr0: No medium found
failed to read /dev/sde: No medium found
failed to read /dev/sdd: No medium found
failed to read /dev/sdc: No medium found
failed to read /dev/sdb: No medium found
failed to read
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 03:57:19PM -0600, Travis Shivers wrote:
Here is the output from the commands:
# ./btrfs-debug-tree -R /dev/sdh
failed to read /dev/sr0: No medium found
failed to read /dev/sde: No medium found
failed to read /dev/sdd: No medium found
failed to read /dev/sdc: No
Thank you all for helping. My btrfs array consists of 4 disks: 2 (2
TB) disks and 2(500 GB) disks. Since I have disks of different sizes,
I have the array being mirrored so that there are two copies of a file
on two separate disks. The data and metadata are mirrored.
I originally made the array
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 05:11:24PM -0600, Travis Shivers wrote:
Thank you all for helping. My btrfs array consists of 4 disks: 2 (2
TB) disks and 2(500 GB) disks. Since I have disks of different sizes,
I have the array being mirrored so that there are two copies of a file
on two separate
I was running a fairly old version of the kernel:
Linux server 3.0.0-16-generic #28-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jan 27 17:44:39 UTC
2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 05:11:24PM -0600, Travis Shivers wrote:
I just noticed that there's a bugreport from opensuse user tripping over
the same BUG() during log replay (and his problem was solved by
btrfs-zero-log), probably after some crash. The kernel version was 3.1
ie. without the corruption fixes, so while it happened during normal use
(and not via a
Karel Zak posted on Tue, 28 Feb 2012 23:35:57 +0100 as excerpted:
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 06:07:31PM +, Duncan wrote:
Unfortunately, since gpt is reasonably new in terms of filesystem and
partitioning tools, there isn't really anything (mount, etc) that makes
/use/ of that label yet,
You might try sorting the entries returned by readdir by inode number before
you stat them.This is a long-standing weakness in ext3/ext4, and it has to
do with how we added hashed tree indexes to directories in (a) a backwards
compatible way, that (b) was POSIX compliant with respect to
- We might unlock head-mutex while it was not locked
- We might leave the function without unlocking delayed_refs-lock
Signed-off-by: Li Zefan l...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/backref.c |8 ++--
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/backref.c
24 matches
Mail list logo
