Hi Franziska,
(2014/06/27 14:00), Franziska Näpelt wrote:
Hi!
After about 12 hours of booting, the system runs now
Congratulations!
The fifth harddrive is still in the btrfs-pool.
Here is the log from the crash, while the btrfs delete job runs:
Jun 25 20:34:59 hsad-srv-03 kernel:
Hi Franziska,
(2014/06/26 20:34), Franziska Näpelt wrote:
Hi Satoru,
I'm sorry, but the boot process is always runnig(i hope so), i can't
login until now. So therefore i have currently no logs.
I don't want to interrupt these process, because there are a lot of
fileactions on the harddrive
I've been getting blocked tasks on 3.15.1 generally at times when the
filesystem is somewhat busy (such as doing a backup via scp/clonezilla
writing to the disk).
A week ago I had enabled snapper for a day which resulted in a daily
cleanup of about 8 snapshots at once, which might have
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 09:40:40PM +0200, Nils Steinger wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 05:04:42PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 04:23:48AM +0200, Nils Steinger wrote:
+ rmdir -p --ignore-fail-on-non-empty $(DESTDIR)$(man8dir)
+ rmdir -p --ignore-fail-on-non-empty
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:53:05AM +0800, Gui Hecheng wrote:
@@ -2521,6 +2521,9 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
}
argc = argc - optind;
+ if (argc 2)
Please use the check_argc_min helper instead. Thanks.
+ print_usage();
+
dev_cnt = argc - 1;
Tomasz Chmielewski posted on Fri, 27 Jun 2014 12:02:43 +0200 as excerpted:
I've been getting blocked tasks on 3.15.1 generally at times when the
filesystem is somewhat busy (such as doing a backup via scp/clonezilla
writing to the disk).
I've started seeing similar on several servers, after
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 03:38:33PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
+FILE ATTRIBUTES
+---
+The btrfs filesystem supports setting the following file
+attributes the `chattr`(1) utility
+append only (a), no atime updates (A), compressed (c), no copy on write (C),
+no dump (d),
On 6/27/14, 8:42 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 03:38:33PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
+FILE ATTRIBUTES
+---
+The btrfs filesystem supports setting the following file
+attributes the `chattr`(1) utility
+append only (a), no atime updates (A), compressed (c), no
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Hopefully that problem's fixed on 3.16-rc2+, but as of yet there's not
enough 3.16-rc2+ reports out there from folks experiencing issues with
3.15 blocked tasks to rightfully say.
Any chance that it was backported to 3.15.2?
On 6/27/14, 10:30 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 09:56:10AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
* and 'X' does not mean no compression and never has, although I'd
like to see a chattr bit for that because we have the corresponding
inode bit
Ok, then I'm not sure what it does
Hi,
I setup 2 Linux servers to share the same device through iSCSI. Then I
created a btrfs on the device. Then I saw the problem that the 2 Linux
servers do not see a consistent file system image.
Details:
-- Server 1 running kernel 2.6.32, server 2 running 3.2.1
-- Both running btrfs v0.20-rc1
On Jun 27, 2014, at 9:14 AM, Rich Freeman r-bt...@thefreemanclan.net wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Hopefully that problem's fixed on 3.16-rc2+, but as of yet there's not
enough 3.16-rc2+ reports out there from folks experiencing issues with
3.15
Hi,
On 06/27/2014 05:44 PM, Zhe Zhang wrote:
Hi,
I setup 2 Linux servers to share the same device through iSCSI. Then I
created a btrfs on the device. Then I saw the problem that the 2 Linux
servers do not see a consistent file system image.
Details:
-- Server 1 running kernel 2.6.32,
On 6/27/14, 11:10 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 10:36:54AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
...
btrfs tries to handle a flag value which is identical to the
'X' flag value, which lsattr/chattr says is readonly...
I'm looking at it from the kernel side, ie what's its meaning of
On 2014-06-27 12:34, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Hi,
On 06/27/2014 05:44 PM, Zhe Zhang wrote:
Hi,
I setup 2 Linux servers to share the same device through iSCSI. Then I
created a btrfs on the device. Then I saw the problem that the 2 Linux
servers do not see a consistent file system image.
Chris Murphy posted on Fri, 27 Jun 2014 09:52:46 -0600 as excerpted:
On Jun 27, 2014, at 9:14 AM, Rich Freeman r-bt...@thefreemanclan.net
wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Hopefully that problem's fixed on 3.16-rc2+, but as of yet there's not
enough
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Austin S Hemmelgarn
ahferro...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2014-06-27 12:34, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Hi,
On 06/27/2014 05:44 PM, Zhe Zhang wrote:
Hi,
I setup 2 Linux servers to share the same device through iSCSI. Then I
created a btrfs on the device. Then I saw
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Jun 27, 2014, at 9:14 AM, Rich Freeman r-bt...@thefreemanclan.net wrote:
I got another block this morning and failed to capture a log before my
terminals gave out. I switched back to 3.15.0 for the moment, and
Hello, =)
I got a problem with a simple backup bash script. It creates a snapshot and
then backs it up.
The user (Ubuntu 12.04, 64-bit) interrupted the script with CTRL+C shortly
after it started.
Then the machine was rebooted several times. Now these snapshots cannot be
deleted anymore
and
My laptop deadlocked some more times (everything works until it needs to
touch the filesystem, and then it's deadlocked).
Unfortunately, I can trigger sysrq, but it doesn't get committed to disk and
netconsole eats half of it because it goes too fast for UDP apparently
Now, I just captured that
Hello,
With kernel 3.14.5...
$ sudo umount /mnt/net/alpha/11
umount: /mnt/net/alpha/11: not mounted
$ sudo mount -o inode_cache,space_cache,compress=lzo,noatime,nossd,skip_balance
/dev/nbd11 /mnt/net/alpha/11
$ sudo mount | grep nbd11
/dev/nbd11 on /mnt/net/alpha/11 type btrfs
The commit
0780253 btrfs: Cleanup the btrfs_parse_options for remount.
broke ssd options quite badly; it stopped making ssd_spread
imply ssd, and it made nossd unsettable.
Put things back at least as well as they were before
(though ssd mount option handling is still pretty odd:
# mount -o
On Jun 27, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Sébastien ROHAUT sebastien.roh...@free.fr wrote:
Hi,
In the wiki, it's said we can mount subvolumes with different mount options.
nosuid, nodev, rw and ro are listed, as valid generic mount options.
This might require 3.15. I don't recall it working with early
On Jun 27, 2014, at 4:08 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Jun 27, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Sébastien ROHAUT sebastien.roh...@free.fr
wrote:
Hi,
In the wiki, it's said we can mount subvolumes with different mount options.
nosuid, nodev, rw and ro are listed, as valid
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 02:50:10PM -0700, ronnie sahlberg wrote:
If I don't hear anything by the end of today, I'll just delete the
filesystem and start over.
At some stage it would be nice to see not only fixes but also changes
to fsck to make it able to repair these problems.
Blow it
On 06/27/2014 11:50 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
My laptop deadlocked some more times (everything works until it needs to
touch the filesystem, and then it's deadlocked).
Unfortunately, I can trigger sysrq, but it doesn't get committed to disk and
netconsole eats half of it because it goes too fast
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 18:34:34 Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
I don't think that it is possible to mount the _same device_ at the _same
time_ on two different machines. And this doesn't depend by the filesystem.
If you use a clustered filesystem then you can safely mount it on multiple
machines.
If
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 03:36:08PM -0700, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 06/27/2014 11:50 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
My laptop deadlocked some more times (everything works until it needs to
touch the filesystem, and then it's deadlocked).
Unfortunately, I can trigger sysrq, but it doesn't get committed to
Mark noticed that his qgroup accounting for snapshot deletion wasn't working
properly on a particular file system. Turns out we pass the root-objectid of
the root we are deleting to btrfs_free_extent, and use that root always when we
call btrfs_free_tree_block. This isn't correct, the owner must
On 06/27/2014 04:59 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 03:36:08PM -0700, Josef Bacik wrote:
On 06/27/2014 11:50 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
My laptop deadlocked some more times (everything works until it needs to
touch the filesystem, and then it's deadlocked).
Unfortunately, I can
On 06/27/2014 05:05 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
Mark noticed that his qgroup accounting for snapshot deletion wasn't working
properly on a particular file system. Turns out we pass the root-objectid of
the root we are deleting to btrfs_free_extent, and use that root always when we
call
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 05:20:41 PM Duncan wrote:
If I'm not mistaken the fix for the 3.16 series bug was:
ea4ebde02e08558b020c4b61bb9a4c0fcf63028e
Btrfs: fix deadlocks with trylock on tree nodes.
That patch applies cleanly to 3.15.2 so if it is indeed the fix it should
probably go to
Can I get more protection by using more than 2 drives?
I had an onboard RAID a few years back that would let me use RAID1
across up to 4 drives.
Apologies if this has been covered already, I don't recall seeing
anything saying yay or nay.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 20:30:32 Zack Coffey wrote:
Can I get more protection by using more than 2 drives?
I had an onboard RAID a few years back that would let me use RAID1
across up to 4 drives.
Currently the only RAID level that fully works in BTRFS is RAID-1 with data on
2 disks. If you
On 06/27/2014 07:40 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 18:34:34 Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
I don't think that it is possible to mount the _same device_ at the _same
time_ on two different machines. And this doesn't depend by the filesystem.
If you use a clustered filesystem then
Russell Coker posted on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 10:51:00 +1000 as excerpted:
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 20:30:32 Zack Coffey wrote:
Can I get more protection by using more than 2 drives?
I had an onboard RAID a few years back that would let me use RAID1
across up to 4 drives.
Currently the only RAID
36 matches
Mail list logo
