Re: number of subvolumes

On 08/31/2017 06:18 PM, Duncan wrote: [...] > Michał Sokołowski posted on Thu, 31 Aug 2017 16:38:14 +0200 as excerpted: >> Is there another tool to verify fragments number of given file when >> using compression? > AFAIK there isn't an official one, tho someone posted a script (python, > IIRC) at

Re: Scrub doesn't correct coruption

On 10/23/2017 10:39 AM, Wolf wrote: > [...] > > Is this and issue somewhere inside btrfs or is disk HW related problem? Highly unlikely hardware related. According to SMART and dmsg, there's no indication which would suggest disk failure. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: OFF-By-One Trouble? [BTRFS in Debian Stretch Kernel 4.9.0-4-amd64]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 12/12/2017 11:22 AM, Juergen Sauer wrote: > Hi collegues, Hello. > > this morning we've got a problm with btrfs in Debian Stable. > > Yesterday we had our fs filled below 30% space usage. No further > usage came in the usage is nearly the

Re: [RFC v2] Improve subvolume usability for a normal user

On 12/11/2017 07:38 AM, Misono, Tomohiro wrote: > - Change the default behavior to allow a user to delete subvolume which is > empty >From sysadmin point of view I think it's worth considering the following scenario(s): what if admin wants one persistent snapshot undeletable by the user? -

Re: [RFC v2] Improve subvolume usability for a normal user

And also, how to prevent creation of the snapshots by the user. On 12/11/2017 08:30 AM, ein wrote: > On 12/11/2017 07:38 AM, Misono, Tomohiro wrote: >> - Change the default behavior to allow a user to delete subvolume which is >> empty > From sysadmin point of view I think it's

Re: csum failed root raveled during balance

On 05/23/2018 08:32 AM, Nikolay Borisov wrote: Nikolay, thank you for the answer. >> [...] >> root@node0:~# dmesg | grep BTRFS | grep warn >> 185:980:[2927472.393557] BTRFS warning (device dm-0): csum failed root >> -9 ino 312 off 608284672 csum 0x7d03a376 expected csum 0x3163a9b7 mirror 1 >>

Re: csum failed root raveled during balance

On 05/23/2018 11:09 AM, Duncan wrote: > ein posted on Wed, 23 May 2018 10:03:52 +0200 as excerpted: > >>> IMHO the best course of action would be to disable checksumming for you >>> vm files. >> >> Do you mean '-o nodatasum' mount flag? Is it possible to di

csum failed root raveled during balance

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 etc. The tests ended with: root@node0:~# dmesg | grep BTRFS | grep warn 185:980:[2927472.393557]

ntfs -> qemu -> raw-image -> btrfs -> iscsi

Hello group, does anyone have had any luck with hosting qemu kvm images resided on BTRFS filesystem while serving the volume via iSCSI? I encouraged some unidentified problem and I am able to replicate it. Basically the NTFS filesystem inside RAW image gets corrupted every time when Windows

Re: ntfs -> qemu -> raw-image -> btrfs -> iscsi

On 06/15/2018 08:10 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > On 2018-06-15 13:40, Chris Murphy wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 5:33 AM, ein wrote: >>> Hello group, >>> >>> does anyone have had any luck with hosting qemu kvm images resided on BTRFS >>> file

Re: csum failed root raveled during balance

On 05/27/2018 11:41 AM, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 27.05.2018 08:50, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> 23.05.2018 09:32, Nikolay Borisov пишет: >>> >>> >>> On 22.05.2018 23:05, ein wrote: >>>> Hello devs, >>>> >>>> I t

Re: csum failed root raveled during balance

On 05/23/2018 01:03 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > On 2018-05-23 06:09, ein wrote: >> On 05/23/2018 11:09 AM, Duncan wrote: >>> ein posted on Wed, 23 May 2018 10:03:52 +0200 as excerpted: >>> >>>>> IMHO the best course of action would be to disable

Re: csum failed root raveled during balance

On 05/29/2018 02:12 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > On 2018-05-28 13:10, ein wrote: >> On 05/23/2018 01:03 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: >>> On 2018-05-23 06:09, ein wrote: >>>> On 05/23/2018 11:09 AM, Duncan wrote: >>>>> ein posted on

Re: Recommendations for balancing as part of regular maintenance?

On 01/08/2018 04:55 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > [...] > > And here's the FAQ entry: > > Q: Do I need to run a balance regularly? > > A: In general usage, no. A full unfiltered balance typically takes a > long time, and will rewrite huge amounts of data unnecessarily. You may > wish to run

Re: Periodic frame losses when recording to btrfs volume with OBS

On 01/22/2018 09:59 AM, Duncan wrote: > Sebastian Ochmann posted on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 16:27:55 +0100 as excerpted: > [...] > On 2018年01月20日 18:47, Sebastian Ochmann wrote: Hello, I would like to describe a real-world use case where btrfs does not perform well for me. I'm

Re: A Big Thank You, and some Notes on Current Recovery Tools.

On 01/01/2018 08:44 PM, Stirling Westrup wrote: > On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 7:15 AM, Kai Krakow wrote: >> Am Mon, 01 Jan 2018 18:13:10 +0800 schrieb Qu Wenruo: >> >>> On 2018年01月01日 08:48, Stirling Westrup wrote: 1) I had a 2T drive die with exactly 3 hard-sector

Re: A Big Thank You, and some Notes on Current Recovery Tools.

On 01/02/2018 01:45 PM, Marat Khalili wrote: >> I think the 1-3TB Seagate drives are garbage. > > There are known problems with ST3000DM001, but first of all you should not > put PC-oriented disks in RAID, they are not designed for it on multiple > levels (vibration tolerance, error

Re: BTRFS and databases

On 08/02/2018 11:16 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > However I wonder: Is this it? Is there nothing that can be improved in > BTRFS to handle database and VM files in a better way, without altering > any default settings? Poor performance is not the biggest BTRFS problem, it's known for silent

Re: DRDY errors are not consistent with scrub results

On 08/28/2018 12:51 AM, Cerem Cem ASLAN wrote: > Hi, > Good morning. > > I'm not sure how to proceed at the moment. Taking succesfull backups > made me think that everything might be okay but I'm not sure if I > should continue trusting the drive or not. What additional checks > should I