On 31/10/12 10:57, Franke wrote:
> I have been having some crashes like this. Since I upgraded to 3.6.4
> they have become common. The crashes happen pretty randomly during
> normal system usage. After the syslog messages the system stays semi
> usable for a minute, but when I run any new program
On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 22:38 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 09:35:37AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> >
> > The intention of lib/uuid.c is to unify various UUID related code, and
> > put them in same place. In addition to UUID generation, it provide some
> > other utility and ma
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 09:35:37AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
>
> The intention of lib/uuid.c is to unify various UUID related code, and
> put them in same place. In addition to UUID generation, it provide some
> other utility and may provide/collect more in the future. So do you
> think it is a g
On 10/31/2012 08:40 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> On 10/30/2012 11:20 PM, Gábor Nyers wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> How could one find out if 2 files share any extents on a btrfs file system?
>>
>> A more generic variation of the above: How to list files on the same
>> file system/subvolume sharing content?
One idea i
On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 00:48 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:49:58AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> > The uuid_le/be_gen() in lib/uuid.c has set UUID variants to be DCE,
> > that is done in __uuid_gen_common() with "b[8] = (b[8] & 0x3F) | 0x80".
>
> Oh, I see, I missed that.
>
On 10/31/2012 08:47 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> On 10/31/2012 07:57 AM, Franke wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have been having some crashes like this. Since I upgraded to 3.6.4 they
>> have become common. The crashes happen pretty randomly during normal system
>> usage. After the syslog messages the system sta
On 10/31/2012 07:57 AM, Franke wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have been having some crashes like this. Since I upgraded to 3.6.4 they
> have become common. The crashes happen pretty randomly during normal system
> usage. After the syslog messages the system stays semi usable for a minute,
> but when I r
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 08:34:38AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> Besides 'btrfs fi defrag', mounting with autodefrag may also do the same
> thing.
Ok, autodefrag, good point. Then I suggest to make the snapshot-aware a
mode of autodefrag, not a separate option (because it would make no
sense other than
On 10/30/2012 11:20 PM, Gábor Nyers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How could one find out if 2 files share any extents on a btrfs file system?
>
> A more generic variation of the above: How to list files on the same
> file system/subvolume sharing content?
>
Indeed ocfs2 already has the feature where you can
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 07:47:28PM +0800, ching wrote:
> failed to open /bin/bash
> open:: Text file busy
That's not a btrfs problem, you can't directly modify an executable that
is being used.
> failed to open /lib64/ld-2.15.so
> failed to open /sbin/agetty
> failed to open /
On 10/31/2012 07:31 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 06:28:41PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
>> This feature works on our crucial write endio path, so if we've got
>> lots of fragments to process, it will be kind of a disaster to the
>> performance, so I make such a change.
>>
>> One can b
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM, ching wrote:
> On 10/31/2012 06:19 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:14:12PM +, Hugo Mills wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 05:40:25AM +0800, ching wrote:
On 10/30/2012 08:17 PM, cwillu wrote:
>>> If there is a lot of small files, t
On 10/30/2012 08:08 PM, cwillu wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:47 AM, ching wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I try to defrag my btrfs root partition (run by root privilege)
>>
>> find / -type f -o -type d -print0 | xargs --null --no-run-if-empty btrfs
>> filesystem defragment -t $((32*1024*1024))
>>
>>
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 07:47:14AM +0800, ching wrote:
> On 10/31/2012 06:19 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:14:12PM +, Hugo Mills wrote:
> >>> if i have 10G small files in total, then it will consume 20G by default.
> >>If those small files are each 128 bytes in size,
Patch looks ok, juste one thing that caught my attention (and does not block
the patch)
a bit of context:
1224 if (fs_info->fs_devices->rw_devices == 0) {
1225 ret = -EACCES;
1226 goto restore;
1227 }
> +
Hello,
I have been having some crashes like this. Since I upgraded to 3.6.4 they have
become common. The crashes happen pretty randomly during normal system usage.
After the syslog messages the system stays semi usable for a minute, but when I
run any new program it hangs. I had to downgrade to
On 10/31/2012 06:19 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:14:12PM +, Hugo Mills wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 05:40:25AM +0800, ching wrote:
>>> On 10/30/2012 08:17 PM, cwillu wrote:
>> If there is a lot of small files, then the size of metadata will be
>> undesirable d
On 10/31/2012 06:16 AM, cwillu wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:40 PM, ching wrote:
>> On 10/30/2012 08:17 PM, cwillu wrote:
> If there is a lot of small files, then the size of metadata will be
> undesirable due to deduplication
Yes, that is a fact, but if that really matters depen
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 06:28:41PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> This feature works on our crucial write endio path, so if we've got
> lots of fragments to process, it will be kind of a disaster to the
> performance, so I make such a change.
>
> One can benifit from it while mounting with '-o snap_aware_
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:14:12PM +, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 05:40:25AM +0800, ching wrote:
> > On 10/30/2012 08:17 PM, cwillu wrote:
> > >>> If there is a lot of small files, then the size of metadata will be
> > >>> undesirable due to deduplication
> > >>
> > >> Yes, that
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:40 PM, ching wrote:
> On 10/30/2012 08:17 PM, cwillu wrote:
If there is a lot of small files, then the size of metadata will be
undesirable due to deduplication
>>>
>>> Yes, that is a fact, but if that really matters depends on the use-case
>>> (e.g., the small
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 05:40:25AM +0800, ching wrote:
> On 10/30/2012 08:17 PM, cwillu wrote:
> >>> If there is a lot of small files, then the size of metadata will be
> >>> undesirable due to deduplication
> >>
> >> Yes, that is a fact, but if that really matters depends on the use-case
> >> (e.g
On 10/30/2012 08:17 PM, cwillu wrote:
>>> If there is a lot of small files, then the size of metadata will be
>>> undesirable due to deduplication
>>
>> Yes, that is a fact, but if that really matters depends on the use-case
>> (e.g., the small files to large files ratio, ...). But as btrfs is desi
On 10/30/2012 08:04 PM, Felix Pepinghege wrote:
> Hi ching!
>
> Am 30.10.2012 12:04, schrieb ching:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am testing my btrfs root partition with "max_inline=0", and 64k leaf size
>> for weeks and it seems that it is fine.
>>
>>
>> AFAIK btrfs inline small files into metadata by defau
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 08:51:42PM +, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 04:14:39PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > This patch passes a data pointer along to the alloc_inode
> > super_operations function. The value will initially be used by
> > bdev_alloc_inode to allocate the bdev_inode on
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Liu Bo wrote:
> On 10/30/2012 04:06 AM, Mitch Harder wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
>>> This comes from one of btrfs's project ideas,
>>> As we defragment files, we break any sharing from other snapshots.
>>> The balancing code will prese
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 04:14:39PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> This patch passes a data pointer along to the alloc_inode
> super_operations function. The value will initially be used by
> bdev_alloc_inode to allocate the bdev_inode on the same numa
> node as the device to which it is tied.
Yecchhh
This patch passes a data pointer along to the alloc_inode
super_operations function. The value will initially be used by
bdev_alloc_inode to allocate the bdev_inode on the same numa
node as the device to which it is tied.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Moyer
---
fs/afs/super.c |5 +++--
fs/blo
On Oct 30, 2012, at 12:32 PM, Michael Kjörling wrote:
>
>
> I'm not so much concerned about the exact word being used as I feel
> the same word should be used throughout a UI to describe the same
> concept. Whether it's called "free" space, "unused" space,
> "unallocated" space or "fuzzbar'd" s
On 30 Oct 2012 19:15 +0100, from kreij...@gmail.com (Goffredo Baroncelli):
> On 2012-10-30 10:42, Michael Kjörling wrote:
>> what is the difference between "unused" and "unallocated"? If there
>> is no difference, I feel the same word should be used throughout.
>
> I had to use "Unused" instead of
On 2012-10-30 10:42, Michael Kjörling wrote:
> On 29 Oct 2012 23:21 +0100, from kreij...@gmail.com (Goffredo Baroncelli):
>> Hi all,
[...]
> One thing, though; what is the difference between "unused" and
> "unallocated"? If there is no difference, I feel the same word should
> be used throughout.
The current behavior is to allow mounting or remounting a filesystem
writeable in degraded mode if at least one writeable device is
present.
The next failed write access to a missing device which is above
the tolerance of the configured level of redundancy results in an
read-only enforcement. Even
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 07:04:59PM +0800, ching wrote:
> I am testing my btrfs root partition with "max_inline=0", and 64k leaf
> size for weeks and it seems that it is fine.
Related to inlining itself, ext4 and xfs are receiving inline data
support, so it would make sense to introduce a per-file
On Tue, October 30, 2012 at 16:39 (+0100), Hugo Mills wrote:
> It should be possible to walk through the
> extents of a given file, and (I think) follow back-refs from the
> extent back to the other files that share it.
You wish :-) Backrefs are not made to walk them while the file system is onlin
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:48:02AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> Then, I figured, I'd try mounting all the active snapshots one per one,
> and they worked:
>
> After that, I was able to mount the root (volid 0) without a crash and
> my filesystem looks fine again.
Ok, I was wrong.
What happened is
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 04:20:05PM +0100, Gábor Nyers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How could one find out if 2 files share any extents on a btrfs file system?
>
> A more generic variation of the above: How to list files on the same
> file system/subvolume sharing content?
You have direct (read-only) acce
Hi,
How could one find out if 2 files share any extents on a btrfs file system?
A more generic variation of the above: How to list files on the same
file system/subvolume sharing content?
Thanks,
Gábor
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a mes
Hi ching!
Am 30.10.2012 12:04, schrieb ching:
Hi all,
I am testing my btrfs root partition with "max_inline=0", and 64k leaf size for
weeks and it seems that it is fine.
AFAIK btrfs inline small files into metadata by default, I am curious why?
If there is only a few small files, then there
>> If there is a lot of small files, then the size of metadata will be
>> undesirable due to deduplication
>
>
> Yes, that is a fact, but if that really matters depends on the use-case
> (e.g., the small files to large files ratio, ...). But as btrfs is designed
> explicitly as a general purpose fi
Hi ching!
Am 30.10.2012 12:04, schrieb ching:
Hi all,
I am testing my btrfs root partition with "max_inline=0", and 64k leaf size for
weeks and it seems that it is fine.
AFAIK btrfs inline small files into metadata by default, I am curious why?
If there is only a few small files, then there
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 6:04 AM, ching wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am testing my btrfs root partition with "max_inline=0", and 64k leaf size
> for weeks and it seems that it is fine.
>
>
> AFAIK btrfs inline small files into metadata by default, I am curious why?
>
> If there is only a few small files
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:47 AM, ching wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I try to defrag my btrfs root partition (run by root privilege)
>
> find / -type f -o -type d -print0 | xargs --null --no-run-if-empty btrfs
> filesystem defragment -t $((32*1024*1024))
>
>
> 1. This kind of error messages is prompted:
>
Hi all,
I try to defrag my btrfs root partition (run by root privilege)
find / -type f -o -type d -print0 | xargs --null --no-run-if-empty btrfs
filesystem defragment -t $((32*1024*1024))
1. This kind of error messages is prompted:
failed to open /bin/bash
open:: Text file busy
to
Hi all,
I am testing my btrfs root partition with "max_inline=0", and 64k leaf size for
weeks and it seems that it is fine.
AFAIK btrfs inline small files into metadata by default, I am curious why?
If there is only a few small files, then there will be neither effect nor
benefit at all
If th
On 29 Oct 2012 23:21 +0100, from kreij...@gmail.com (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.
In general, I like
45 matches
Mail list logo
