We need to hold the tree mod log lock in __tree_mod_log_rewind since we walk
forward in the tree mod entries, otherwise we'll end up with random entries and
trip the BUG_ON() at the front of __tree_mod_log_rewind. This fixes the panics
people were seeing when running
find /whatever -type f -exec
Martin posted on Sat, 29 Jun 2013 14:48:40 +0100 as excerpted:
> This is the btrfsck output for a real-world rsync backup onto a btrfs
> raid1 mirror across 4 drives (yes, I know at the moment for btrfs raid1
> there's only ever two copies of the data...)
Being just a btrfs user I don't have a de
On 29/06/13 10:41, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jun 2013, Martin wrote:
>> Mmmm... I'm not sure trying to balance historical read/write counts is
>> the way to go... What happens for the use case of an SSD paired up with
>> a HDD? (For example an SSD and a similarly sized Raptor or enterprise
This is the btrfsck output for a real-world rsync backup onto a btrfs
raid1 mirror across 4 drives (yes, I know at the moment for btrfs raid1
there's only ever two copies of the data...)
checking extents
checking fs roots
root 5 inode 18446744073709551604 errors 2000
root 5 inode 1844674407370955
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 01:12:58PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> I missed fixing the backref stuff when I introduced the skinny metadata. If
> you
> try and do things like snapshot aware defrag with skinny metadata you are
> going
> to see tons of warnings related to the backref count being less t
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 01:08:21PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:25:39AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > Several users reported this crash of NULL pointer or general protection,
> > the story is that we add a rbtree for speedup ulist iteration, and we
> > use krealloc() to address
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:43:14PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:37:45PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > Several users reported this crash of NULL pointer or general protection,
> > the story is that we add a rbtree for speedup ulist iteration, and we
> > use krealloc() to address
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013, Martin wrote:
> Mmmm... I'm not sure trying to balance historical read/write counts is
> the way to go... What happens for the use case of an SSD paired up with
> a HDD? (For example an SSD and a similarly sized Raptor or enterprise
> SCSI?...) Or even just JBODs of a mishmash
> Making this with all 6 devices from the beginning and btrfsck doesn't
> segfault. But it also doesn't repair the system enough to make it
> mountable. ( nether does -o recover, however -o degraded works, and
> files
> are then accessible )
Not sure I entirely follow: mounting with -o degraded (n
Hi,
I'm evaluating btrfs for a future deployment, and managed to
(repeatedly
) get btrfs to the state where the system can't mount, can't fsck and
can't
recover.
The test setup is pretty small, 6 devices of various size:
butter-1.5GA vg_dolt -wi-a
1.50g
butter-1.5GB vg_dolt -wi-a---
10 matches
Mail list logo