Re: What if TRIM issued a wipe on devices that don't TRIM?

06.12.2018 16:04, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: > > * On SCSI devices, a discard operation translates to a SCSI UNMAP > command.  As pointed out by Ronnie Sahlberg in his reply, this command > is purely advisory, may not result in any actual state change on the > target device, and is not

Re: Need help with potential ~45TB dataloss

02.12.2018 23:14, Patrick Dijkgraaf пишет: > I have some additional info. > > I found the reason the FS got corrupted. It was a single failing drive, > which caused the entire cabinet (containing 7 drives) to reset. So the > FS suddenly lost 7 drives. > This remains mystery for me. btrfs is

Re: Have 15GB missing in btrfs filesystem.

27.10.2018 21:12, Remi Gauvin пишет: > On 2018-10-27 01:42 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote: > >> >> I've been using btrfs for a long time now but I've never had a >> filesystem where I had 15GB apparently unusable (7%) after a balance. >> > > The space isn't unusable. It's just allocated.. (It's used in

Re: FS_IOC_FIEMAP fe_physical discrepancies on btrfs

27.10.2018 18:45, Lennert Buytenhek пишет: > Hello! > > FS_IOC_FIEMAP on btrfs seems to be returning fe_physical values that > don't always correspond to the actual on-disk data locations. For some > files the values match, but e.g. for this file: > > # filefrag -v foo > Filesystem type is:

Re: Have 15GB missing in btrfs filesystem.

24.10.2018 3:36, Marc MERLIN пишет: > Normally when btrfs fi show will show lost space because > your trees aren't balanced. > Balance usually reclaims that space, or most of it. > In this case, not so much. > > kernel 4.17.6: > > saruman:/mnt/btrfs_pool1# btrfs fi show . > Label: 'btrfs_pool1'

Re: Is it possible to construct snapshots manually?

19.10.2018 12:41, Cerem Cem ASLAN пишет: > By saying "manually", I mean copying files into a subvolume on a > different mountpoint manually, then mark the target as if it is > created by "btrfs send | btrfs receive". > > Rationale: > > When we delete all common snapshots from source, we have to

Re: Spurious mount point

16.10.2018 0:33, Chris Murphy пишет: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Anton Shepelev wrote: >> Chris Murphy to Anton Shepelev: >> How can I track down the origin of this mount point: /dev/sda2 on /home/hana type btrfs

Re: CoW behavior when writing same content

09.10.2018 18:52, Chris Murphy пишет: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Gervais, Francois > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> If I have a snapshot where I overwrite a big file but which only a >> small portion of it is different, will the whole file be rewritten in >> the snapshot? Or only the different part

Re: GRUB writing to grubenv outside of kernel fs code

18.09.2018 22:11, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: > On 2018-09-18 14:38, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> 18.09.2018 21:25, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: >>> On 2018-09-18 14:16, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >>>> 18.09.2018 08:37, Chris Murphy пишет: >>>>> On Mo

Re: GRUB writing to grubenv outside of kernel fs code

18.09.2018 21:57, Chris Murphy пишет: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Andrei Borzenkov > wrote: >> 18.09.2018 08:37, Chris Murphy пишет: > >>> The patches aren't upstream yet? Will they be? >>> >> >> I do not know. Personally I think much e

Re: btrfs receive incremental stream on another uuid

18.09.2018 21:28, Gervais, Francois пишет: >> No. It is already possible (by setting received UUID); it should not be > made too open to easy abuse. > > > Do you mean edit the UUID in the byte stream before btrfs receive? > No, I mean setting received UUID on subvolume. Unfortunately, it is

Re: GRUB writing to grubenv outside of kernel fs code

18.09.2018 21:25, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: > On 2018-09-18 14:16, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> 18.09.2018 08:37, Chris Murphy пишет: >>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 11:24 PM, Andrei Borzenkov >>> wrote: >>>> 18.09.2018 07:21, Chris Murphy пишет: >>>

Re: GRUB writing to grubenv outside of kernel fs code

18.09.2018 08:37, Chris Murphy пишет: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 11:24 PM, Andrei Borzenkov > wrote: >> 18.09.2018 07:21, Chris Murphy пишет: >>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Chris Murphy >>> wrote: >>>> https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ

Re: btrfs receive incremental stream on another uuid

18.09.2018 20:56, Gervais, Francois пишет: > > Hi, > > I'm trying to apply a btrfs send diff (done through -p) to another subvolume > with the same content as the proper parent but with a different uuid. > > I looked through btrfs receive and I get the feeling that this is not > possible

Re: GRUB writing to grubenv outside of kernel fs code

18.09.2018 07:21, Chris Murphy пишет: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ#Does_grub_support_btrfs.3F >> >> Does anyone know if this is still a problem on Btrfs if grubenv has >> xattr +C set? In which case it should be possible to

Re: lazytime mount option—no support in Btrfs

Отправлено с iPhone > 19 авг. 2018 г., в 11:37, Martin Steigerwald написал(а): > > waxhead - 18.08.18, 22:45: >> Adam Hunt wrote: >>> Back in 2014 Ted Tso introduced the lazytime mount option for ext4 >>> and shortly thereafter a more generic VFS implementation which was >>> then merged into

Re: trouble mounting btrfs filesystem....

14.08.2018 18:16, Hans van Kranenburg пишет: > On 08/14/2018 03:00 PM, Dmitrii Tcvetkov wrote: >>> Scott E. Blomquist writes: >>> > Hi All, >>> > >>> > [...] >> >> I'm not a dev, just user. >> btrfs-zero-log is for very specific case[1], not for transid errors. >> Transid errors mean that some

Re: Report correct filesystem usage / limits on BTRFS subvolumes with quota

12.08.2018 10:04, Andrei Borzenkov пишет: > > On ZFS snapshots are contained in dataset and you limit total dataset > space consumption including all snapshots. Thus end effect is the same - > deleting data that is itself captured in snapshot does not make a single > byte availa

Re: Report correct filesystem usage / limits on BTRFS subvolumes with quota

12.08.2018 06:16, Chris Murphy пишет: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 9:29 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: >> Chris Murphy posted on Fri, 10 Aug 2018 12:07:34 -0600 as excerpted: >> >>> But whether data is shared or exclusive seems potentially ephemeral, and >>> not something a sysadmin should

Re: Report correct filesystem usage / limits on BTRFS subvolumes with quota

10.08.2018 12:33, Tomasz Pala пишет: > >> For 4 disk with 1T free space each, if you're using RAID5 for data, then >> you can write 3T data. >> But if you're also using RAID10 for metadata, and you're using default >> inline, we can use small files to fill the free space, resulting 2T >>

Re: Report correct filesystem usage / limits on BTRFS subvolumes with quota

10.08.2018 21:21, Tomasz Pala пишет: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 07:39:30 -0400, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > >>> I.e.: every shared segment should be accounted within quota (at least once). >> I think what you mean to say here is that every shared extent should be >> accounted to quotas for

Re: Report correct filesystem usage / limits on BTRFS subvolumes with quota

10.08.2018 10:33, Tomasz Pala пишет: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 07:03:18 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > >>> So - the limit set on any user >> >> Does btrfs support per-user quota at all? I am aware only of per-subvolume >> quotas. > > Well, this is a kind

Re: BTRFS and databases

Отправлено с iPhone > 2 авг. 2018 г., в 10:02, Qu Wenruo написал(а): > > > >> On 2018年08月01日 11:45, MegaBrutal wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I know it's a decade-old question, but I'd like to hear your thoughts >> of today. By now, I became a heavy BTRFS user. Almost everywhere I use >> BTRFS,

Re: BTRFS and databases

Отправлено с iPhone > 2 авг. 2018 г., в 12:16, Martin Steigerwald написал(а): > > Hugo Mills - 01.08.18, 10:56: >>> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 05:45:15AM +0200, MegaBrutal wrote: >>> I know it's a decade-old question, but I'd like to hear your >>> thoughts >>> of today. By now, I became a heavy

Re: File permissions lost during send/receive?

24.07.2018 15:16, Marc Joliet пишет: > Hi list, > > (Preemptive note: this was with btrfs-progs 4.15.1, I have since upgraded to > 4.17. My kernel version is 4.14.52-gentoo.) > > I recently had to restore the root FS of my desktop from backup (extent tree > corruption; not sure how, possibly

Re: [PATCH 0/4] 3- and 4- copy RAID1

20.07.2018 20:16, Goffredo Baroncelli пишет: > On 07/20/2018 07:17 AM, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> 18.07.2018 22:42, Goffredo Baroncelli пишет: >>> On 07/18/2018 09:20 AM, Duncan wrote: >>>> Goffredo Baroncelli posted on Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:59:52 +0200 as >>>&

Re: [PATCH 0/4] 3- and 4- copy RAID1

18.07.2018 22:42, Goffredo Baroncelli пишет: > On 07/18/2018 09:20 AM, Duncan wrote: >> Goffredo Baroncelli posted on Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:59:52 +0200 as >> excerpted: >> >>> On 07/17/2018 11:12 PM, Duncan wrote: Goffredo Baroncelli posted on Mon, 16 Jul 2018 20:29:46 +0200 as excerpted:

Re: Healthy amount of free space?

18.07.2018 16:30, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: > On 2018-07-18 09:07, Chris Murphy wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 6:35 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn >> wrote: >> >>> If you're doing a training presentation, it may be worth mentioning that >>> preallocation with fallocate() does not behave the same

Re: btrfs check (not lowmem) and OOM-like hangs (4.17.6)

18.07.2018 03:05, Qu Wenruo пишет: > > > On 2018年07月18日 04:59, Marc MERLIN wrote: >> Ok, I did more testing. Qu is right that btrfs check does not crash the >> kernel. >> It just takes all the memory until linux hangs everywhere, and somehow (no >> idea why) >> the OOM killer never triggers.

Re: how to best segment a big block device in resizeable btrfs filesystems?

03.07.2018 10:15, Duncan пишет: > Andrei Borzenkov posted on Tue, 03 Jul 2018 07:25:14 +0300 as excerpted: > >> 02.07.2018 21:35, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: >>> them (trimming blocks on BTRFS gets rid of old root trees, so it's a >>> bit dangerous to do

Re: how to best segment a big block device in resizeable btrfs filesystems?

02.07.2018 21:35, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: > them (trimming blocks on BTRFS gets rid of old root trees, so it's a bit > dangerous to do it while writes are happening). Could you please elaborate? Do you mean btrfs can trim data before new writes are actually committed to disk? -- To

Re: how to best segment a big block device in resizeable btrfs filesystems?

03.07.2018 04:37, Qu Wenruo пишет: > > BTW, IMHO the bcache is not really helping for backup system, which is > more write oriented. > There is new writecache target which may help in this case. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message

Re: Incremental send/receive broken after snapshot restore

t;Could not find base snapshot matching UUID xxx" would be far less ambiguous. > Marc > > On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 01:03:37AM +0200, Hannes Schweizer wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 10:02 PM Andrei Borzenkov >> wrote: >>> >>> 30.06.2018 21:49, Andre

Re: Incremental send/receive broken after snapshot restore

30.06.2018 21:49, Andrei Borzenkov пишет: > 30.06.2018 20:49, Hannes Schweizer пишет: ... >> >> I've tested a few restore methods beforehand, and simply creating a >> writeable clone from the restored snapshot does not work for me, eg: >> # create some source sn

Re: Incremental send/receive broken after snapshot restore

30.06.2018 20:49, Hannes Schweizer пишет: > On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 8:24 AM Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> >> Do not reply privately to mails on list. >> >> 29.06.2018 22:10, Hannes Schweizer пишет: >>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 7:44 PM Andrei Borzenkov >>&

Re: Incremental send/receive broken after snapshot restore

Do not reply privately to mails on list. 29.06.2018 22:10, Hannes Schweizer пишет: > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 7:44 PM Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> >> 28.06.2018 23:09, Hannes Schweizer пишет: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Here's my environment: >>> Linux diablo

Re: unsolvable technical issues?

30.06.2018 06:22, Duncan пишет: > Austin S. Hemmelgarn posted on Mon, 25 Jun 2018 07:26:41 -0400 as > excerpted: > >> On 2018-06-24 16:22, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: >>> On 06/23/2018 07:11 AM, Duncan wrote: waxhead posted on Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:13:31 +0200 as excerpted: > According

Re: Incremental send/receive broken after snapshot restore

28.06.2018 23:09, Hannes Schweizer пишет: > Hi, > > Here's my environment: > Linux diablo 4.17.0-gentoo #5 SMP Mon Jun 25 00:26:55 CEST 2018 x86_64 > Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU 760 @ 2.80GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux > btrfs-progs v4.17 > > Label: 'online' uuid: e4dc6617-b7ed-4dfb-84a6-26e3952c8390

Re: Major design flaw with BTRFS Raid, temporary device drop will corrupt nodatacow files

28.06.2018 12:15, Qu Wenruo пишет: > > > On 2018年06月28日 16:16, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 8:39 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2018年06月28日 11:14, r...@georgianit.com wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> O

Re: Major design flaw with BTRFS Raid, temporary device drop will corrupt nodatacow files

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 8:39 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> >> >> On 2018年06月28日 11:14, r...@georgianit.com wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018, at 10:55 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: >>>

Re: Major design flaw with BTRFS Raid, temporary device drop will corrupt nodatacow files

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 8:39 AM, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > On 2018年06月28日 11:14, r...@georgianit.com wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018, at 10:55 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> >>> >>> Please get yourself clear of what other raid1 is doing. >> >> A drive failure, where the drive is still there when the

Re: in which directions does btrfs send -p | btrfs receive work

07.06.2018 05:50, Christoph Anton Mitterer пишет: > Hey. > > Just wondered about the following: > > When I have a btrfs which acts as a master and from which I make copies > of snapshots on it via send/receive (with using -p at send) to other > btrfs which acts as copies like this: > master

Re: csum failed root raveled during balance

23.05.2018 09:32, Nikolay Borisov пишет: > > > On 22.05.2018 23:05, ein wrote: >> Hello devs, >> >> I tested BTRFS in production for about a month: >> >> 21:08:17 up 34 days, 2:21, 3 users, load average: 0.06, 0.02, 0.00 >> >> Without power blackout, hardware failure, SSD's SMART is flawless

Re: RAID56 - 6 parity raid

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 10:29 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: ... > > Assume you have a BTRFS raid5 volume consisting of 6 8TB disks (which gives > you 40TB of usable space). You're storing roughly 20TB of data on it, using > a 16kB block size, and it sees about 1GB of

Re: How to replace a failed drive in btrfs RAID 1 filesystem

09.03.2018 19:43, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: > > If the answer to either one or two is no but the answer to three is yes, > pull out the failed disk, put in a new one, mount the volume degraded, > and use `btrfs replace` as well (you will need to specify the device ID > for the now missing

Re: Change of Ownership of the filesystem content when cloning a volume

10.03.2018 02:13, Saravanan Shanmugham (sarvi) пишет: > > Netapp’s storage system, has the concept of snapshot/clones. > And when I create a clone from a snapshot, I can give/change ownership of > entire tree in the volume to a different userid. You are probably mistaken. NetApp FlexClone

Re: Inconsistence between sender and receiver

09.03.2018 08:38, Liu Bo пишет: > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 09:15:50AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> 07.03.2018 21:49, Liu Bo пишет: >>> Hi, >>> >>> In the following steps[1], if on receiver side has got >>> changed via 'btrfs property set', then

Re: How to change/fix 'Received UUID'

08.03.2018 19:02, Marc MERLIN пишет: > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 09:34:45AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> 08.03.2018 09:06, Marc MERLIN пишет: >>> On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 12:02:47PM -0800, Marc MERLIN wrote: >>>>> https://githu

Re: How to change/fix 'Received UUID'

08.03.2018 09:06, Marc MERLIN пишет: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 12:02:47PM -0800, Marc MERLIN wrote: >>> https://github.com/knorrie/python-btrfs/commit/1ace623f95300ecf581b1182780fd6432a46b24d >> >> Well, I had never heard about it until now, thank you. >> >> I'll see if I can make it work when I

Re: Inconsistence between sender and receiver

07.03.2018 21:49, Liu Bo пишет: > Hi, > > In the following steps[1], if on receiver side has got > changed via 'btrfs property set', then after doing incremental > updates, receiver gets a different snapshot from what sender has sent. > > The reason behind it is that there is no change about

Re: How to change/fix 'Received UUID'

05.03.2018 19:16, Marc MERLIN пишет: > Howdy, > > I did a bunch of copies and moving around subvolumes between disks and > at some point, I did a snapshot dir1/Win_ro.20180205_21:18:31 > dir2/Win_ro.20180205_21:18:31 > > As a result, I lost the ro flag, and apparently 'Received UUID' which is >

Re: btrfs space used issue

On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 12:26 PM, vinayak hegde wrote: > No, there is no opened file which is deleted, I did umount and mounted > again and reboot also. > > I think I am hitting the below issue, lot of random writes were > happening and the file is not fully written and

Re: btrfs space used issue

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:01 AM, vinayak hegde wrote: > I ran full defragement and balance both, but didnt help. Showing the same information immediately after full defragment would be helpful. > My created and accounting usage files are matching the du -sh output. >

Re: Btrfs occupies more space than du reports...

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Shyam Prasad N wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the reply. > >> * `df` calls `statvfs` to get it's data, which tries to count physical >> allocation accounting for replication profiles. In other words, data in >> chunks with the dup, raid1, and

Re: incremental send/receive ERROR: cannot find parent subvolume

27.02.2018 01:54, Emil.s пишет: > Hello, > > I'm trying to restore a subvolume from a backup, but I'm failing when > I try to setup the replication chain again. > > Previously I had disk A and B, where I was sending snapshots from A to > B using "send -c /disk_a/1 /disk_a/2 | receive /disk_b"

Re: btrfs-cleaner / snapshot performance analysis

11.02.2018 04:02, Hans van Kranenburg пишет: ... > >> - /dev/sda6 / btrfs >> rw,relatime,ssd,space_cache,subvolid=259,subvol=/@/.snapshots/1/snapshot >> 0 0 > > Note that changes on atime cause writes to metadata, which means cowing > metadata blocks and unsharing them from a previous snapshot,

Re: IO Error (.snapshots is not a btrfs subvolume)

08.02.2018 06:03, Chris Murphy пишет: > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 6:26 PM, Nick Gilmour wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I have successfully restored a snapshot of root but now when I try to How exactly was it done? >> make a new snapshot I get this error: >> IO Error (.snapshots is

Re: degraded permanent mount option

29.01.2018 14:24, Adam Borowski пишет: ... > > So any event (the user's request) has already happened. A rc system, of > which systemd is one, knows whether we reached the "want root filesystem" or > "want secondary filesystems" stage. Once you're there, you can issue the > mount() call and let

Re: degraded permanent mount option

28.01.2018 18:57, Duncan пишет: > Andrei Borzenkov posted on Sun, 28 Jan 2018 11:06:06 +0300 as excerpted: > >> 27.01.2018 18:22, Duncan пишет: >>> Adam Borowski posted on Sat, 27 Jan 2018 14:26:41 +0100 as excerpted: >>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 27, 2

Re: degraded permanent mount option

27.01.2018 18:22, Duncan пишет: > Adam Borowski posted on Sat, 27 Jan 2018 14:26:41 +0100 as excerpted: > >> On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 12:06:19PM +0100, Tomasz Pala wrote: >>> On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 13:26:13 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >>> >>>>> I j

Re: degraded permanent mount option

e any systemd message when degraded option >> is missing and have to remount manually with degraded. >> >> It seems it is better to use mdadm for raid and btrfs over it as i >> understand. Even in recent kernel ? >> I hav me to do some bench and compare... >

Re: degraded permanent mount option

raded and only 1/2 root device. Then your initramfs does not use systemd. > -- > Christophe Yayon > cyayon-l...@nbux.org > > > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018, at 06:50, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> 26.01.2018 17:47, Christophe Yayon пишет: >>> Hi Austin,

Re: degraded permanent mount option

26.01.2018 17:47, Christophe Yayon пишет: > Hi Austin, > > Thanks for your answer. It was my opinion too as the "degraded" seems to be > flagged as "Mostly OK" on btrfs wiki status page. I am running Archlinux with > recent kernel on all my servers (because of use of btrfs as my main >

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: ... >> >> Unless some better fix is in the works, this _should_ be a systemd unit or >> something. Until then, please put it in FAQ. > > At least openSUSE has a systemd unit for a long time now, but last > time I

Re: how to make a cache directory nodatacow while also excluded from snapshots?

16.01.2018 00:56, Dave пишет: > I want to exclude my ~/.cache directory from snapshots. The obvious > way to do this is to mount a btrfs subvolume at that location. > > However, I also want the ~/.cache directory to be nodatacow. Since the > parent volume is COW, I believe it isn't possible to

Re: Unexpected raid1 behaviour

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:07 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > YaST doesn't have Btrfs raid1 or raid10 options; and also won't do > encrypted root with Btrfs either because YaST enforces LVM to do LUKS > encryption for some weird reason; and it also enforces NOT putting >

Re: Unexpected raid1 behaviour

19.12.2017 22:47, Chris Murphy пишет: > >> >> BTW, doesn't SuSE use btrfs by default? Would you expect everyone using >> this distro to research every component used? > > As far as I'm aware, only Btrfs single device stuff is "supported". > The multiple device stuff is definitely not supported

Re: Unexpected raid1 behaviour

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 1:49 AM, Anand Jain wrote: > >> Agreed. IMO degraded-raid1-single-chunk is an accidental feature >> caused by [1], which we should revert back, since.. >>- balance

Re: btrfs subvolume list for not mounted filesystem?

18.12.2017 19:49, Ulli Horlacher пишет: > I want to mount an alternative subvolume of a btrfs filesystem. > I can list the subvolumes when the filesystem is mounted, but how do I > know them, when the filesystem is not mounted? Is there a query command? > > root@xerus:~# mount | grep /test >

How exclusive in parent qgroup is computed? (was: Re: exclusive subvolume space missing)

02.12.2017 03:27, Qu Wenruo пишет: > > That's the difference between how sub show and quota works. > > For quota, it's per-root owner check. > Means even a file extent is shared between different inodes, if all > inodes are inside the same subvolume, it's counted as exclusive. > And if any of

Re: btrfs-transacti hammering the system

01.12.2017 21:04, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: > On 2017-12-01 12:13, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> 01.12.2017 20:06, Hans van Kranenburg пишет: >>> >>> Additional tips (forgot to ask for your /proc/mounts before): >>> * Use the noatime mount option, so that on

Re: btrfs-transacti hammering the system

01.12.2017 20:06, Hans van Kranenburg пишет: > > Additional tips (forgot to ask for your /proc/mounts before): > * Use the noatime mount option, so that only accessing files does not > lead to changes in metadata, Is not 'lazytime" default today? It gives you correct atime + no extra metadata

Re: Read before you deploy btrfs + zstd

29.11.2017 16:24, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: > On 2017-11-28 18:49, David Sterba wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 09:31:57PM +, Nick Terrell wrote: >>> On Nov 21, 2017, at 8:22 AM, David Sterba wrote: On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 08:09:15PM +, Nick Terrell

Re: bug? fstrim only trims unallocated space, not unused in bg's

19.11.2017 09:17, Chris Murphy пишет: > fstrim should trim free space, but it only trims unallocated. This is > with kernel 4.14.0 and the entire 4.13 series. I'm pretty sure it > behaved this way with 4.12 also. > Well, I was told it should also trim free space ...

Re: Need help with incremental backup strategy (snapshots, defragmentingt & performance)

16.11.2017 19:13, Kai Krakow пишет: ... > > BTW: From user API perspective, btrfs snapshots do not guarantee > perfect granular consistent backups. Is it documented somewhere? I was relying on crash-consistent write-order-preserving snapshots in NetApp for as long as I remember. And I was sure

Re: how to repair or access broken btrfs?

14.11.2017 12:56, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG пишет: > Hello, > > after a controller firmware bug / failure i've a broken btrfs. > > # parent transid verify failed on 181846016 wanted 143404 found 143399 > > running repair, fsck or zero-log always results in the same failure message: >

Re: updatedb does not index /home when /home is Btrfs

04.11.2017 21:55, Chris Murphy пишет: > On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidj...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 04.11.2017 10:05, Adam Borowski пишет: >>> On Sat, Nov 04, 2017 at 09:26:36AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >>>> 04.11.2017 07:49, Adam

Re: updatedb does not index /home when /home is Btrfs

04.11.2017 10:05, Adam Borowski пишет: > On Sat, Nov 04, 2017 at 09:26:36AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> 04.11.2017 07:49, Adam Borowski пишет: >>> On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 06:15:53PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >>>> Ancient bug, still seems to be a bug. &g

Re: updatedb does not index /home when /home is Btrfs

04.11.2017 07:49, Adam Borowski пишет: > On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 06:15:53PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> Ancient bug, still seems to be a bug. >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906591 >> >> The issue is that updatedb by default will not index bind mounts, but >> by default on Fedora

Re: Several questions regarding btrfs

02.11.2017 20:13, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: >> >> 2. I want to limit access to sftp, so there will be no custom commands >> to execute... > A custom version of the 'quota' command would be easy to add in there. > In fact, this is really the only option right now, since setting up sudo > (or

Re: Several questions regarding btrfs

01.11.2017 15:01, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: ... > The default subvolume is what gets mounted if you don't specify a > subvolume to mount.  On a newly created filesystem, it's subvolume ID 5, > which is the top-level of the filesystem itself.  Debian does not > specify a subvo9lume in /etc/fstab

Re: Several questions regarding btrfs

31.10.2017 20:45, Austin S. Hemmelgarn пишет: > On 2017-10-31 12:23, ST wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I've recently learned about btrfs and consider to utilize for my needs. >> I have several questions in this regard: >> >> I manage a dedicated server remotely and have some sort of script that >>

Re: SLES 11 SP4: can't mount btrfs

26.10.2017 15:18, Lentes, Bernd пишет: > >> -Original Message- >> From: linux-btrfs-ow...@vger.kernel.org >> [mailto:linux-btrfs-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Lentes, Bernd >> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 6:44 PM >> To: Btrfs ML >> Subject: RE: SLES

Re: SLES 11 SP4: can't mount btrfs

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > > SLES (and OpenSUSE in general) does do something special though, they use > subvolumes and qgroups to replicate multiple independent partitions (which > is a serious pain in the arse), and they have

Re: SLES 11 SP4: can't mount btrfs

19.10.2017 23:04, Chris Murphy пишет: > Btrfs > is not just supported by SUSE, it's the default file system. > It is default choice for root starting with SLES12, not in SLES11. But yes, it should still be supported. I do not hold my breath though. For all I can tell transid errors are usually

Re: [PATCH v4] btrfs: Remove received_uuid during received snapshot ro->rw switch

07.10.2017 00:27, Hans van Kranenburg пишет: > On 10/06/2017 10:07 PM, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> >> What is reason behind allowing change from ro to rw in the first place? >> What is the use case? > > I think this is a case of "well, nobody actually has been thin

Re: [PATCH v4] btrfs: Remove received_uuid during received snapshot ro->rw switch

06.10.2017 20:49, Hans van Kranenburg пишет: > On 10/06/2017 07:24 PM, David Sterba wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 05:03:47PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: >>> On 10/05/2017 04:22 PM, Nikolay Borisov wrote: Currently when a read-only snapshot is received and subsequently its ro property

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs-progs: subvol: change subvol set-default to also accept subvol path

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Misono, Tomohiro wrote: > This patch changes "subvol set-default" to also accept the subvolume path > for convenience. > > This is the one of the issue on github: > https://github.com/kdave/btrfs-progs/issues/35 > > If there are two

Re: What means "top level" in "btrfs subvolume list" ?

30.09.2017 14:57, Goffredo Baroncelli пишет: > (please ignore my previous email, because I wrote somewhere "top id" instead > of "top level") > Hi All, > > I am trying to figure out which means "top level" in the output of "btrfs sub > list" > > Digging in git history - "top level"

Re: What means "top level" in "btrfs subvolume list" ?

30.09.2017 17:53, Peter Grandi пишет: >> I am trying to figure out which means "top level" in the >> output of "btrfs sub list" > > The terminology (and sometimes the detailed behaviour) of Btrfs > is not extremely consistent, I guess because of permissive > editorship of the design, in a "let

Re: Wrong device?

26.09.2017 10:31, Lukas Pirl пишет: > On 09/25/2017 06:11 PM, linux-bt...@oh3mqu.pp.hyper.fi wrote as excerpted: >> After a long googling (about more complex situations) I suddenly >> noticed "device sdb" WTF???  Filesystem is mounted from /dev/md3 (sdb >> is part of that mdraid) so btrfs should

Re: AW: Btrfs performance with small blocksize on SSD

24.09.2017 16:53, Fuhrmann, Carsten пишет: > Hello, > > 1) > I used direct write (no page cache) but I didn't disable the Disk cache of > the HDD/SSD itself. In all tests I wrote 1GB and looked for the runtime of > that write process. So "latency" on your diagram means total time to write 1GiB

Re: difference between -c and -p for send-receive?

20.09.2017 22:05, Antoine Belvire пишет: > Hello, > >> All snapshots listed in -c options and snapshot that we want to >> transfer must have the same parent uuid, unless -p is explicitly >> provided. > > It's rather the same mount point than the same parent uuid, like cp > --reflink, isn't it?

Re: difference between -c and -p for send-receive?

19.09.2017 03:41, Dave пишет: > new subject for new question > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidj...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> What scenarios can lead to "ERROR: parent determination failed"? >>> >>> The man p

Re: ERROR: parent determination failed (btrfs send-receive)

18.09.2017 09:10, Dave пишет: > I use snap-sync to create and send snapshots. > > GitHub - wesbarnett/snap-sync: Use snapper snapshots to backup to external > drive > https://github.com/wesbarnett/snap-sync > Are you trying to backup top-level subvolume? I just reproduced this behavior with

Re: Storage and snapshots as historical yearly

system. What you can do, is to rotate devices. I.e. remove /dev/md126, set seed flag on md127 and add md126 back. I actually tested it and it works for me. > Thank you very much for the reply. > Greetings. > > El martes, 12 de septiembre de 2017 6:34:15 (CEST) Andrei Borzenkov e

Re: difference between -c and -p for send-receive?

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Graham Cobb wrote: > On 19/09/17 01:41, Dave wrote: >> Would it be correct to say the following? > > Like Duncan, I am just a user, and I haven't checked the code. I > recommend Duncan's explanation, but in case you are looking for > something

Re: ERROR: parent determination failed (btrfs send-receive)

18.09.2017 11:45, Graham Cobb пишет: > On 18/09/17 07:10, Dave wrote: >> For my understanding, what are the restrictions on deleting snapshots? >> >> What scenarios can lead to "ERROR: parent determination failed"? > > The man page for btrfs-send is reasonably clear on the requirements > btrfs

Re: how to run balance successfully (No space left on device)?

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote: >>> # df -h /var/lib/lxd >>> >>> FWIW, standard (aka util-linux) df is effectively useless in a situation >>> such as this, as it really doesn't give you the information you need (it >>> can say you have lots of space

Re: ERROR: parent determination failed (btrfs send-receive)

18.09.2017 05:31, Dave пишет: > Sometimes when using btrfs send-receive, I get errors like this: > > ERROR: parent determination failed for > > When this happens, btrfs send-receive backups fail. And all subsequent > backups fail too. > > The issue seems to stem from the fact that an automated

  1   2   >