On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 14:01 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 06:41:44PM +, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 10:29 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 01:17:04PM +, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
Hello,
When I booted my
On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 11:14 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 03:43:37PM +, Maciej Marcin Piechotka
wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 14:01 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 06:41:44PM +, Maciej Marcin Piechotka
wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 10:29
Hello,
When I booted my machine (after clean powerdown) the following message
appeared:
[ 32.757913] device fsid ---- devid 1
transid 40864 /dev/mapper/X-X
[ 32.758466] btrfs: use lzo compression
[ 32.758475] btrfs: enabling disk space caching
[
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 10:29 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 01:17:04PM +, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
Hello,
When I booted my machine (after clean powerdown) the following message
appeared:
[ 32.757913] device fsid ---- devid 1
On Sat, 2011-11-05 at 22:22 -0400, Eric Griffith wrote:
Hey guys, I've been trying out BTRFS the last couple days, just to
kind of see what to expect and what I can do with it once its
finalized and we have a working fsck. I do have a couple question that
neither the Arch Wiki, The Fedora
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 23:03 +0200, krz...@gmail.com wrote:
If you delete a large number of files, then there is no avoiding the
fact that a lot of metadata needs to be updated. In this respect
btrfs
is unlikely to be significantly faster than any other filing system.
Are you sure? That
On Sun, 2011-10-02 at 19:39 +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Sat, Oct 01, 2011 at 11:43:10PM +0200, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
PS. It might happened that it was caused by parition mounted read-only
on read-only block device.
^^^
This is the key information!
super.c
After merging btrfs-next patches (chris' btrfs-3.0 branch) I get
following error:
[ 9799.199495] [ cut here ]
[ 9799.199511] kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/super.c:984!
[ 9799.199524] invalid opcode: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
[ 9799.199539] CPU 1
[ 9799.199542] Modules linked in:
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 16:37 -0400, Anadon wrote:
Hello all,
I'm trying to look into working on some few features for a filesystem,
and figured that if they were to be adopted, better work on the current
project. I'm looking for the standard documentaion, and a copy of the
source. I have
On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 02:44 +0200, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 14:27 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
Unfortunately it results in freeze of system and I cannot give more
details. Sometimes it happens not from fcron but then it does not result
in freeze
On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 10:53 +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
I've noticed that:
- with x86-64 Fedora 15 DVD install images:
- du -sh ROOT VOLUME was 36 GB
- btrfs df | grep -i data have shown over 40 GB used
- without
- du -sh ROOT VOLUME is 34 GB
On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 08:19 +0200, Paweł Brodacki wrote:
Hello,
I've stumbled upon this article:
http://storagemojo.com/2011/06/27/de-dup-too-much-of-good-thing/
Reportedly Sandforce SF1200 SSD controller does internally block-level
data de-duplication. This effectively removes the
I've noticed that:
- with x86-64 Fedora 15 DVD install images:
- du -sh ROOT VOLUME was 36 GB
- btrfs df | grep -i data have shown over 40 GB used
- without
- du -sh ROOT VOLUME is 34 GB
- btrfs df | grep -i data have shown less then 34 GB used
It seems that iso files are
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 14:27 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
Unfortunately it results in freeze of system and I cannot give more
details. Sometimes it happens not from fcron but then it does not result
in freeze (???).
Could you give me the method to reproduce it?
Thanks
Miao
Sorry for
1. Once the blank screen happened ot 23:00 UTC instead of 03:00 UTC
2. I tried to disable the caches
3. I tried to rsync via ext3 + btrfs-convert. I noticed something - in
old fs the df looked like:
Data: total=30.01GB, used=28.42GB
System, DUP: total=8.00MB, used=4.00KB
System: total=4.00MB,
On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 20:25 +0200, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
1. Once the blank screen happened ot 23:00 UTC instead of 03:00 UTC
2. I tried to disable the caches
3. I tried to rsync via ext3 + btrfs-convert. I noticed something - in
old fs the df looked like:
Data: total=30.01GB, used
On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 20:30 +0200, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 20:25 +0200, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
1. Once the blank screen happened ot 23:00 UTC instead of 03:00 UTC
2. I tried to disable the caches
3. I tried to rsync via ext3 + btrfs-convert. I noticed
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 05:16 +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Felix Blanke felixbla...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm using btrfs since one year now and it's quite fast. I don't feel any
differences to other filesystems. Never tried a benchmark but for my daily
work it's
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 13:42 +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Maciej Marcin Piechotka
uzytkown...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 05:16 +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Felix Blanke felixbla...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 14:27 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
On mon, 29 Aug 2011 02:45:07 +0100, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
I receive the bug when I try to snapshot from fcron:
2011-08-29T02:00:46.529238+01:00 picard kernel: [ 4155.76]
[ cut here ]
2011-08-29T02
On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 09:02 +0600, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 02:13:38 +0100
Maciej Marcin Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.com wrote:
c) It usually happens a few minutes past 3 UTC. I have no idea what is
casuing this but it is consistent.
Did you check if your /etc/crontab
On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 12:18 +0100, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 09:47 +0100, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 14:27 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
On mon, 29 Aug 2011 02:45:07 +0100, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
I receive the bug when I try
I get filesystem corruption when I unsuccessfully hibernate using
tuxonice. I don't get this problem using standard suspend.
While I understand TOI is not in mainline it requires no modification
for non-FUSE filesystems. where should I report the problem?
Best regards
signature.asc
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 09:47 +0100, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 14:27 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
On mon, 29 Aug 2011 02:45:07 +0100, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
I receive the bug when I try to snapshot from fcron:
2011-08-29T02:00:46.529238+01:00 picard kernel
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 14:27 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
On mon, 29 Aug 2011 02:45:07 +0100, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
I receive the bug when I try to snapshot from fcron:
2011-08-29T02:00:46.529238+01:00 picard kernel: [ 4155.76]
[ cut here ]
2011-08-29T02
I receive the bug when I try to snapshot from fcron:
2011-08-29T02:00:46.529238+01:00 picard kernel: [ 4155.76]
[ cut here ]
2011-08-29T02:00:46.529253+01:00 picard kernel: [ 4155.90] kernel
BUG at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2299!
2011-08-29T02:00:46.529256+01:00 picard
On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 19:55 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
That said I also do not have any issues with BTRFS on a ThinkPad T23
for /
and /home. But then the machine has an hibernate-to-disk-and-resume
uptime
of almost 120 days, so it didn´t see a power loss for a long time.
Thats
Hello,
I got btrfs corruption and I'm not sure if it is known yet. i suspect
that it happened after hard reset (I got freeze first so I'm not sure if
it wasn't caused by something else).
The symptoms are that the allocation grows at all time during
read/writes (it reached 49 GB for 30 GB of data
On Mon, 2011-08-22 at 14:06 +0100, Maciej Marcin Piechotka wrote:
Hello,
I got btrfs corruption and I'm not sure if it is known yet. i suspect
that it happened after hard reset (I got freeze first so I'm not sure if
it wasn't caused by something else).
The symptoms are that the allocation
On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 16:50 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
Excerpts from Yalonda Gishtaka's message of 2011-08-17 21:09:37 -0400:
Chris Mason chris.mason at oracle.com writes:
Aside from making sure the kernel code is stable, btrfsck is all I'm
working on right now. I do expect a
30 matches
Mail list logo
