Re: put 2 hard drives in mdadm raid 1 and detect bitrot like btrfs does, what's that called?
Hi Cedric, On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 08:33:18PM +0100, wrote: > it's called "dm-integrity", as mentioned in this e-mail: > https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg93037.html If you do this it would be very interesting to see performance figures for the following setups: - btrfs with raid1 meta and data allocation - mdadm raid1 on raw devices - mdadm raid1 on dm-integrity (no encryption) on raw devices - mdadm raid1 on dm-integrity (encryption) on raw devices just to see what kind of performance loss dm-integrity and encryption is going to impose. After doing it, it would find a nice home on the Linux RAID wiki: https://raid.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Dm-integrity Cheers, Andy
Problems with "btrfs dev remove" of dead disk
Hi, One of my drives died earlier in a fairly emphatic way in that not only did it show IO errors and got removed as a device by the kernel, but it was also making audible grinding/screeching noises until I hot unplugged it. Feb 14 18:29:36 specialbrew kernel: [27576156.070961] ata6.15: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 0) Feb 14 18:29:37 specialbrew kernel: [27576157.215312] ata6.00: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:37 specialbrew kernel: [27576157.555369] ata6.00: SATA link up 6.0 Gbps (SStatus 133 SControl 300) Feb 14 18:29:37 specialbrew kernel: [27576157.560028] ata6.01: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:38 specialbrew kernel: [27576157.915797] ata6.01: SATA link up 6.0 Gbps (SStatus 133 SControl 300) Feb 14 18:29:38 specialbrew kernel: [27576157.920591] ata6.02: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:38 specialbrew kernel: [27576158.275759] ata6.02: SATA link up 6.0 Gbps (SStatus 133 SControl 300) Feb 14 18:29:38 specialbrew kernel: [27576158.280603] ata6.03: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:38 specialbrew kernel: [27576158.603658] ata6.03: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) Feb 14 18:29:38 specialbrew kernel: [27576158.608844] ata6.04: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:39 specialbrew kernel: [27576158.947805] ata6.04: SATA link up 6.0 Gbps (SStatus 133 SControl 300) Feb 14 18:29:39 specialbrew kernel: [27576158.953058] ata6.05: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:39 specialbrew kernel: [27576159.291801] ata6.05: SATA link up 6.0 Gbps (SStatus 133 SControl 300) Feb 14 18:29:39 specialbrew kernel: [27576159.297143] ata6.06: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:39 specialbrew kernel: [27576159.639850] ata6.06: SATA link up 6.0 Gbps (SStatus 133 SControl 300) Feb 14 18:29:39 specialbrew kernel: [27576159.645411] ata6.07: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:40 specialbrew kernel: [27576159.971581] ata6.07: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) Feb 14 18:29:40 specialbrew kernel: [27576159.977251] ata6.08: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:40 specialbrew kernel: [27576160.303533] ata6.08: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) Feb 14 18:29:40 specialbrew kernel: [27576160.310056] ata6.09: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:40 specialbrew kernel: [27576160.635541] ata6.09: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) Feb 14 18:29:40 specialbrew kernel: [27576160.641371] ata6.10: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:41 specialbrew kernel: [27576160.967639] ata6.10: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) Feb 14 18:29:41 specialbrew kernel: [27576160.973591] ata6.11: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:41 specialbrew kernel: [27576161.299570] ata6.11: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) Feb 14 18:29:41 specialbrew kernel: [27576161.305670] ata6.12: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:41 specialbrew kernel: [27576161.631589] ata6.12: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) Feb 14 18:29:41 specialbrew kernel: [27576161.637725] ata6.13: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:42 specialbrew kernel: [27576161.963597] ata6.13: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) Feb 14 18:29:42 specialbrew kernel: [27576161.969538] ata6.14: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:42 specialbrew kernel: [27576162.295657] ata6.14: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) Feb 14 18:29:42 specialbrew kernel: [27576162.303094] ata6.00: configured for UDMA/100 Feb 14 18:29:42 specialbrew kernel: [27576162.310674] ata6.01: configured for UDMA/100 Feb 14 18:29:42 specialbrew kernel: [27576162.317928] ata6.02: configured for UDMA/100 Feb 14 18:29:42 specialbrew kernel: [27576162.326589] ata6.04: configured for UDMA/100 Feb 14 18:29:42 specialbrew kernel: [27576162.337178] ata6.05: configured for UDMA/100 Feb 14 18:29:42 specialbrew kernel: [27576162.344438] ata6.06: configured for UDMA/100 Feb 14 18:29:43 specialbrew kernel: [27576163.607145] ata6.03: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:44 specialbrew kernel: [27576163.935962] ata6.03: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) Feb 14 18:29:44 specialbrew kernel: [27576163.942835] ata6.03: limiting SATA link speed to 1.5 Gbps Feb 14 18:29:49 specialbrew kernel: [27576168.939422] ata6.03: hard resetting link Feb 14 18:29:49 specialbrew kernel: [27576169.264031] ata6.03: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 310) Feb 14 18:29:49 specialbrew kernel: [27576169.270519] ata6.03: disabled Feb 14 18:29:49 specialbrew kernel: [27576169.276874] end_request: I/O error, dev sdh, sector 0 Feb 14 18:29:49 specialbrew kernel: [27576169.282908] btrfs_dev_stat_print_on_error: 965 callbacks suppressed Feb 14 18:29:49 specialbrew kernel: [27576169.282929] ata6: EH complete Feb 14 18:29:49 specialbrew kernel: [27576169.294246] BTRFS: bdev /dev/sdh errs: wr 125, rd 8, flush 1, corrupt 0, gen 0 Feb 14 18:29:49 specialbrew kernel: [27576169.300987] sd 5:3:0:0: rejecting I/O to offline device Feb 14 18:29:49 specialbrew kernel: [27576169.307016] BTRFS: lost page write due to I/O error on /dev/sdh Feb 14 18:29:49 specialbrew kernel: [27576169.312976] BTRFS: bdev /dev/sdh errs: wr 126, rd 8, flush
Re: Problems with "btrfs dev remove" of dead disk
Hi Chris,
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 04:49:29PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Andy Smith wrote:
> > $ sudo btrfs dev remove /dev/sdh /srv/tank
> > ERROR: not a block device: /dev/sdh
>
>
> Since now it's a missing device, it should be
>
> sudo btrfs device remove missing /srv/tank
$ sudo btrfs device remove missing /srv/tank
ERROR: error removing device 'missing': no missing devices found to remove
> But I'm not sure if this works when the volume is not already mounted
> degraded.
I have now done:
# mount -oremount,degraded /srv/tank
and tried again, but it produces the same response ("mount" now does
show "degraded" as one of the mount flags, however).
I have not yet tried completely unmounting it and mounting it again.
> it really doesn't make sense to me you'd want to increase risk of
> more Btrfs problems when such known things are now fixed. Consider
> 4.1.15 if you want a stable long term yet currently supportable
> kernel.
It is inconvenient to reboot just now, so if I'm able to fix things
without doing so (e.g. by balance or replace) then I would like to.
If that won't be possible then I will of course boot into a newer
kernel at the same time.
If I end up booting into 4.1.15 then it should be possible to mount
degraded and remove missing?
Cheers,
Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Is this normal? Should I use scrub?
Hello, I have a 6 device RAID-1 filesystem: $ sudo btrfs fi df /srv/tank Data, RAID1: total=1.24TiB, used=1.24TiB System, RAID1: total=32.00MiB, used=184.00KiB Metadata, RAID1: total=3.00GiB, used=1.65GiB unknown, single: total=512.00MiB, used=0.00 $ sudo btrfs fi sh /srv/tank Label: 'tank' uuid: 472ee2b3-4dc3-4fc1-80bc-5ba967069ceb Total devices 6 FS bytes used 1.24TiB devid2 size 1.82TiB used 384.03GiB path /dev/sdh devid3 size 1.82TiB used 383.00GiB path /dev/sdg devid4 size 1.82TiB used 384.00GiB path /dev/sdf devid5 size 2.73TiB used 1.13TiB path /dev/sdk devid6 size 1.82TiB used 121.00GiB path /dev/sdj devid7 size 2.73TiB used 116.00GiB path /dev/sde Btrfs v3.14.2 All of these devices are in an external eSATA enclosure. A few days ago (I believe) something went wrong with the enclosure hardware and the SCSI bus kept getting reset over and over. At one point three of the six devices were kicked out and the filesystem was left running (read-only) on three devices. Through some trial and error I determined that the enclosure was taking exception to one of the devices, and by removing it I was able to get things up and running with five devices, writeable, mounted in degraded mode. /dev/sdk is the device that was kept out of the filesystem. I do not believe that there is anything wrong with /dev/sdk as I put it in another system and was able to read it entirely, do SMART long tests on it, etc. I wasn't able to prove it is a hardware problem until I took the enclosure out of service as it's the only enclosure I had. So that's a task for later. I have now got a new enclosure and put this system back together with all six devices. I was not expecting this filesystem to mount without assistance on boot because of /dev/sdk being "stale" compared to the other devices. I suppose this incorrect view is a holdover from my experience with mdadm. Anyway, I booted it and /srv/tank was mounted automatically with all six devices. I got a bunch of these messages as soon as it was mounted: http://pastie.org/private/2ghahjwtzlcm6hwp66hkg There's lots more of it but it's all like that. That paste is from the end of the log and there haven't been any more such message since, so that's about 20 minutes (the times are in GMT). Is that normal output indicating that btrfs is repairing the "staleness" of sdk from the other copy? I seem to be able to use the filesystem and a cursory inspection isn't turning up anything that I can't read or that seems corrupted. I will now run checksums against my last good backup. Should I run a scrub as well? Cheers, Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Is this normal? Should I use scrub?
Hi Hugo, Thanks for your help. On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 03:42:02PM +, Hugo Mills wrote: > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 03:11:14PM +0000, Andy Smith wrote: > > Should I run a scrub as well? > >Yes. The output you've had so far will be just the pieces that the > FS has tried to read, and where, as a result, it's been able to detect > the out-of-date data. A scrub will check and fix everything. Thanks, things seem to be fine now. :) What's the difference between "verufy" and "csum" here? scrub status for 472ee2b3-4dc3-4fc1-80bc-5ba967069ceb scrub device /dev/sdh (id 2) history scrub started at Wed Apr 1 20:05:58 2015 and finished after 14642 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 383.42GiB with 0 errors scrub device /dev/sdg (id 3) history scrub started at Wed Apr 1 20:05:58 2015 and finished after 14504 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 382.62GiB with 0 errors scrub device /dev/sdf (id 4) history scrub started at Wed Apr 1 20:05:58 2015 and finished after 14436 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 383.00GiB with 0 errors scrub device /dev/sdk (id 5) history scrub started at Wed Apr 1 20:05:58 2015 and finished after 21156 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 1.13TiB with 14530 errors error details: verify=10909 csum=3621 corrected errors: 14530, uncorrectable errors: 0, unverified errors: 0 scrub device /dev/sdj (id 6) history scrub started at Wed Apr 1 20:05:58 2015 and finished after 5693 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 119.42GiB with 0 errors scrub device /dev/sde (id 7) history scrub started at Wed Apr 1 20:05:58 2015 and finished after 5282 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 114.45GiB with 0 errors Cheers, Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: 40TB volume taking over 16 hours to mount, any ideas?
Hello, On Sat, Aug 09, 2014 at 01:38:34PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote: > On Fri, 8 Aug 2014 16:35:29 Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa wrote: > > Then, after reading here and there, decided to try to use a newer > > kernel, tried 3.15.8. Well, it is still mounting after ~16 hours, and > > I got messages like these at first: > > I recommend trying a 3.14 kernel. I had ongoing problems with kernels before > 3.14 which included infinite loops in kernel space. Based on reports on this > list I haven't been inclined to test 3.15 kernels. But 3.14 has been working > well for me on many systems. I'm in a similar position with a filesystem that won't mount except read-only, but am already on 3.14 and am also wondering whether to try a 3.16 kernel. https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81981 Jose, maybe you could try -oro in the hope of at least getting back to a read-only mount? Cheers, Andy -- "I remember the first time I made love. Perhaps it was not love exactly but I made it and it still works." — The League Against Tedium -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
