, people can do that, if they want to, they just
have to write a proper fstab, which I think is not too much too ask...
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
, and of which
there could be a default subvolume set. Within such a subvolume set
could then use type uuids or so to mount things properly. Or something
like that...
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body
containers on a snapshots of the same
filesystem-tree.
Hmm, dunno, you might have a point there...
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
here, and a suggestion what we should do instead
to cover this usecase...
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
to it will not require any
reservation anymore, and hence are unlikely to fail.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
anybody else from the systemd side afaics. THe entire btrfs defrag
thing i wasn't aware of before this thread started on the system ML a
few days ago. I am not sure where you take your ideas about our
attitude from. God, with behaviour like that you just make us ignore
you, Duncan.
Lennart
--
Lennart
not easy to handle for COW file systems. But then again, it's
probably not too different from access patterns of other database or
database-like engines...
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord
or ubuntu's readahead or Arjan's sreadahead. What's
new is that in the systemd case we try to test for ssd/rotating
properly, instead of just hardcoding a check for
/sys/class/block/sda/queue/rotational.
I hope this explains what the fuck we are doing.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc
for.
Second question is why is checking in /sys a big deal, would you
prefer an interface like we did for alignment in libblkid?
Well, currently there's no way to discover the underlying block devices
if you have a btrfs mount point. This is what Josef's patch added for
us.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering
contains at least one SSD disk);
if (statvfs.f_flag ST_ROTATING)
printf(FS contains at least one rotating disk);
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
have more than a few lines
printed like that?
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
Heya,
I recently added some btrfs magic to systemd's machinectl/nspawn
tool. More specifically it can now show the disk usage of a container
that is stored in a btrfs subvolume. For that I made use of the btrfs
quota logic. To read the current disk usage of a subvolume I took
inspiration from
Heya!
I am looking for a nice way to query the overall last modification
timestamp of a subvolume. i.e. the most recent mtime of *any* file or
directory within a subvolume. Ideally, I think, there was a
btrfs_timespec field for this in struct btrfs_root_item, alas there
isn't afaics. Any chance
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
On Wed, 07.01.15 15:10, Josef Bacik (jba...@fb.com) wrote:
On 01/07/2015 12:43 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya!
Currently, systemd-journald's disk access patterns (appending to the
end of files, then updating a few pointers in the front) result in
awfully fragmented journal files
On Mon, 05.01.15 18:22, Hugo Mills (h...@carfax.org.uk) wrote:
On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 06:15:12PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I recently added some btrfs magic to systemd's machinectl/nspawn
tool. More specifically it can now show the disk usage of a container
On Thu, 08.01.15 10:56, Zygo Blaxell (ce3g8...@umail.furryterror.org) wrote:
On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 06:43:15PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya!
Currently, systemd-journald's disk access patterns (appending to the
end of files, then updating a few pointers in the front) result
in
advance.
Exposig this as xattr sounds great to me too.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
Heya!
Currently, systemd-journald's disk access patterns (appending to the
end of files, then updating a few pointers in the front) result in
awfully fragmented journal files on btrfs, which has a pretty
negative effect on performance when accessing them.
Now, to improve things a bit, I
are recursively stackable, hence having toplevel subvolumes
doesn't work, since the containers should be able to have
subcontainers of their own...
Also, it kinda defeats the whole point of btrfs' subvolume concept,
where subvolumes are little more than special directories.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red
Heya!
So what's the story on recursive btrfs snapshotting and snapshot
removal? Since a while systemd has now by default creating btrfs
subvolumes for /var/lib/machines for example. Now, if that code is run
inside a container, and the container itself already is stored in a
subvolume we end up
On Mon, 23.03.15 08:36, Chris Mason (c...@fb.com) wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:57 AM, Lennart Poettering mzerq...@0pointer.de
wrote:
Heya!
So what's the story on recursive btrfs snapshotting and snapshot
removal? Since a while systemd has now by default creating btrfs
subvolumes
, and you still have the btrfs volume that should be
bootable.
A bit complex, but you almost were there already... ;-)
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo
On Thu, 23.04.15 19:00, arnaud gaboury (arnaud.gabo...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Thu, 23.04.15 14:18, arnaud gaboury (arnaud.gabo...@gmail.com) wrote:
Pick one:
a) download the raw image and use
.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
the dnf/yum install root thing, and install it into a directory
tree.
Do either of those in the host, not in the container.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
On Thu, 23.04.15 14:57, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Thu, 23.04.15 13:45, arnaud gaboury (arnaud.gabo...@gmail.com) wrote:
Not sure what I did wrong, but I can't install/boot my nspawn
, as it already does.
I am pretty sure that mounting degraded file systems should be an
exceptional operation, and not the common scheme. If it should happen
automatically at all, then it should be triggered by some daemon or
so, but not by udev/systemd.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
to a btrfs pool.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
be implemented all
in kernel, based on some configurable kernel setting...)
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
their status.
How this problem is managed in the md/dm raid cases ?
md has a daemon mdmon to my knowledge.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
--
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
On Mon, 15.06.15 19:23, Goffredo Baroncelli (kreij...@inwind.it) wrote:
On 2015-06-15 12:46, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Sat, 13.06.15 17:09, Goffredo Baroncelli (kreij...@libero.it) wrote:
Further, the problem will be more intense in this eg. if you use dd
and copy device A to device
33 matches
Mail list logo
