Hi all,
Last week we had 2 times an uncorrectable ecc memory error crash on
our server on the same memory module.
After removing the faulty module and restarting the server, everything
was working again.
However, yesterday we had a soft lockup and had to restart the server
again. No warning or
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:24:18AM +0100, Joeri Vanthienen wrote:
Hi all,
Last week we had 2 times an uncorrectable ecc memory error crash on
our server on the same memory module.
After removing the faulty module and restarting the server, everything
was working again.
However, yesterday
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 06:50:40PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 09:57:50AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 04:24:43AM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
This can save us a dynamic memory allocation/free.
You can have multiple outstanding delayed iputs per inode,
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 07:04:10PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
Hi Josef,
Could you please pull this into NEXT? Or something wrong here?
Nope I thought I grabbed this, I'll throw it in the queue. Thanks,
Josef
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 06:43:04PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:01:17AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 08:11:54PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
When we are not with inode_cache option, we won't reuse inode id, which
means all of inodes will own different inode
The problem is that a new superblock is written which references a block in the
log tree although this block is written _after_ the superblock is written and
never before.
The referenced block in the following log is the one with the logical byte
number 35770368 which physically is located on
Make sure you have a wide terminal to read the following logs. The
current btrfs-next was taken to run the xfstest suite.
export TEST_DEV=/dev/sdg
export TEST_DIR=/mnt3
export SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/sdi
export SCRATCH_MNT=/mnt2
cd ~/git/xfs/cmds/xfstests
grep check_int common.rc
gives this result:
This is the last part.
./check 078-299
[112]
Dec 12 12:51:05 qvarne root: run xfstest 112
device fsid 55bc7fff-2ed3-48c4-94d8-e4ec5157ae21 devid 1 transid 35 /dev/sdg
btrfs: enabling check integrity
btrfs: use lzo compression
btrfs: enabling auto defrag
btrfs: disk space caching is enabled
On 12/11/2012 06:37 PM, Liu Bo wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 09:33:15AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
On 12/09/2012 07:04 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 09:07:05AM -0700, Jim Schutt wrote:
Hi Jim,
Could you please apply the following patch to test if it works?
Hi,
So far, with
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 09:50:04AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 06:43:04PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:01:17AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 08:11:54PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
When we are not with inode_cache option, we won't
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 09:47:11AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 06:50:40PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 09:57:50AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 04:24:43AM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
This can save us a dynamic memory allocation/free.
So there is no way to have filesystem encryption, while keeping
snapshots?
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012, at 8:16, [2]merc1...@f-m.fm wrote:
We're using a backups server to back up all machines in a LAN. Four 2TB
disks are assembled in a BTRFS RAID array and mounted as /media/backups.
Under this
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:12 AM, merc1...@f-m.fm wrote:
So there is no way to have filesystem encryption, while keeping
snapshots?
I run btrfs on top of LUKS encryption on my laptop. You should be
able to do the same.
You could then run rsync through ssh. However, rsync will have no
I was looking through some of the archives and notice a patch submitted
to implement:
btrfs subvolume show path-to-subvolume
command.
I also noticed that is does not appear to be in the git.
This looks like a useful capability. I was trying to find out what the
UUID was for a newly
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012, at 10:31, Mitch Harder wrote:
I run btrfs on top of LUKS encryption on my laptop. You should be able to do
the same.
You could then run rsync through ssh. However, rsync will have no knowledge
of any blocks shared under subvolume snapshots.
Btrfs does not yet have
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:38 PM, merc1...@f-m.fm wrote:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012, at 10:31, Mitch Harder wrote:
I run btrfs on top of LUKS encryption on my laptop. You should be able to
do the same.
You could then run rsync through ssh. However, rsync will have no knowledge
of any blocks
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 01:22:40PM -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
I was looking through some of the archives and notice a patch
submitted to implement:
btrfs subvolume show path-to-subvolume
command.
I also noticed that is does not appear to be in the git.
This looks like a
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 08:08:52PM +0900, Itaru Kitayama wrote:
Hi Liubo,
I couldn't apply your V4 patch against the btrfs-next HEAD. Do you have
a github branch which I can checkout?
The current btrfs-next HEAD actually
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012, at 10:48, cwillu wrote:
Sayeth the FAQ:
Oh pardon me, it's BTRFS RAID that's a no-go, which is just as critical
to me as I have a 4 disk 8TB array.
The FAQ goeth on to Say:
---
This pretty much forbids you to use
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:06 PM, merc1...@f-m.fm wrote:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012, at 10:48, cwillu wrote:
Sayeth the FAQ:
Oh pardon me, it's BTRFS RAID that's a no-go, which is just as critical
to me as I have a 4 disk 8TB array.
The FAQ goeth on to Say:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 08:16:54AM -0700, Stefan Behrens wrote:
This is the last part.
./check 078-299
[112]
Dec 12 12:51:05 qvarne root: run xfstest 112
device fsid 55bc7fff-2ed3-48c4-94d8-e4ec5157ae21 devid 1 transid 35 /dev/sdg
btrfs: enabling check integrity
btrfs: use lzo
It looks like it's been a bit more than two months since
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git;a=summary
saw patches from the list.
Am I looking in the wrong place for the btrfs-progs upstream?
- z
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 02:42:14PM -0800, Zach Brown wrote:
It looks like it's been a bit more than two months since
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git;a=summary
saw patches from the list.
Am I looking in the wrong place for the btrfs-progs upstream?
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:21 AM, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
Two things:
1) That tree is generally only ever updated for pull requests to Linus
during the merge window. Would that it were otherwise, but I
suspect that...
2) ... you may want to know about josef's btrfs-next
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 04:50:54AM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:21 AM, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
Two things:
*nod*
I think Zach was asking about the userspace tools, not the kernel
module.
But yes, I was asking about -progs :).
- z
--
To
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 04:50:54AM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:21 AM, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
Two things:
1) That tree is generally only ever updated for pull requests to Linus
during the merge window. Would that it were otherwise, but I
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 01:37:21PM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 08:08:52PM +0900, Itaru Kitayama wrote:
Hi Liubo,
I couldn't apply your V4 patch against the btrfs-next HEAD. Do you have
a github
An user reported that he has hit an annoying deadlock while playing with
ceph based on btrfs.
Current updating device tree requires space from METADATA chunk,
so we -may- need to do a recursive chunk allocation when adding/updating
dev extent, that is where the deadlock comes from.
If we use
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 05:25:19PM +0530, Abhijit Pawar wrote:
This patch replace the obsolete simple_strtofoo with kstrtofoo
The XFS changes look fine. Consider those:
Acked-by: Dave Chinner dchin...@redhat.com
--
Dave Chinner
da...@fromorbit.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
29 matches
Mail list logo
