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

Am Mon, 01 Jan 2018 18:13:10 +0800 schrieb Qu Wenruo: > On 2018年01月01日 08:48, Stirling Westrup wrote: >> Okay, I want to start this post with a HUGE THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK >> YOU to Nikolay Borisov and most especially to Qu Wenruo! >> >> Thanks to their tireless help in answering all my dumb

Re: btrfs balance problems

Am Thu, 28 Dec 2017 00:39:37 + schrieb Duncan: >> I can I get btrfs balance to work in the background, without adversely >> affecting other applications? > > I'd actually suggest a different strategy. > > What I did here way back when I was still on reiserfs on spinning rust, > where it

Re: Btrfs allow compression on NoDataCow files? (AFAIK Not, but it does)

Am Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:51:40 -0500 schrieb Chris Mason: > On 12/20/2017 03:59 PM, Timofey Titovets wrote: >> How reproduce: >> touch test_file >> chattr +C test_file >> dd if=/dev/zero of=test_file bs=1M count=1 >> btrfs fi def -vrczlib test_file >> filefrag -v test_file >> >> test_file >>

[4.14] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 779 at fs/btrfs/backref.c:1255 find_parent_nodes+0x892/0x1340

Hello! During balance I'm seeing the following in dmesg: [194123.693226] [ cut here ] [194123.693231] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 779 at fs/btrfs/backref.c:1255 find_parent_nodes+0x892/0x1340 [194123.693232] Modules linked in: f2fs bridge stp llc cifs ccm xfs rfcomm bnep fuse

Ref doesn't match the record start and is compressed

Hello! Since my system was temporarily overloaded (load 500+ for probably several hours but it recovered, no reboot needed), I'm seeing btrfs-related backtraces in dmesg with the fs going RO. I tried to fix it but it fails: > Fixed 0 roots. > checking extents > ref mismatch on [3043919785984

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

Am Fri, 17 Nov 2017 06:51:52 +0300 schrieb Andrei Borzenkov <arvidj...@gmail.com>: > 16.11.2017 19:13, Kai Krakow пишет: > ... > > > BTW: From user API perspective, btrfs snapshots do not guarantee > > perfect granular consistent backups. > > Is it do

Re: Tiered storage?

Am Wed, 15 Nov 2017 08:11:04 +0100 schrieb waxhead : > As for dedupe there is (to my knowledge) nothing fully automatic yet. > You have to run a program to scan your filesystem but all the > deduplication is done in the kernel. > duperemove works apparently quite well

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

Link 2 slipped away, adding it below... Am Tue, 14 Nov 2017 15:51:57 -0500 schrieb Dave : > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote: > > > > On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:39:44 -0500 > > Dave wrote: > > > > > I have my

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

Am Tue, 14 Nov 2017 15:51:57 -0500 schrieb Dave : > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote: > > > > On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:39:44 -0500 > > Dave wrote: > > > > > I have my live system on one block device and a

Re: A partially failing disk in raid0 needs replacement

Am Tue, 14 Nov 2017 17:48:56 +0500 schrieb Roman Mamedov : > [1] Note that "ddrescue" and "dd_rescue" are two different programs > for the same purpose, one may work better than the other. I don't > remember which. :) One is a perl implementation and is the one working worse.

Re: btrfs seed question

Am Thu, 12 Oct 2017 09:20:28 -0400 schrieb Joseph Dunn : > On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:18:01 +0800 > Anand Jain wrote: > > > On 10/12/2017 08:47 AM, Joseph Dunn wrote: > > > After seeing how btrfs seeds work I wondered if it was possible > > > to push

Re: Problem with file system

Am Tue, 31 Oct 2017 07:28:58 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > On 2017-10-31 01:57, Marat Khalili wrote: > > On 31/10/17 00:37, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> But off hand it sounds like hardware was sabotaging the expected > >> write ordering. How to test a given

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Thu, 2 Nov 2017 22:47:31 -0400 schrieb Dave <davestechs...@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > You may want to try btrfs autodefrag mount option and see if it > > improves things (tho, the

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Fri, 3 Nov 2017 08:58:22 +0300 schrieb Marat Khalili : > On 02/11/17 04:39, Dave wrote: > > I'm going to make this change now. What would be a good way to > > implement this so that the change applies to the $HOME/.cache of > > each user? > I'd make each user's .cache a symlink

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Thu, 2 Nov 2017 22:59:36 -0400 schrieb Dave : > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn > wrote: > > On 2017-11-01 21:39, Dave wrote: > >> I'm going to make this change now. What would be a good way to > >> implement this so that

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

Am Thu, 2 Nov 2017 23:24:29 -0400 schrieb Dave <davestechs...@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Am Wed, 1 Nov 2017 02:51:58 -0400 > > schrieb Dave <davestechs...@gmail.com>: > > > [

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Tue, 31 Oct 2017 20:37:27 -0400 schrieb Dave : > > Also, you can declare the '.firefox/default/' directory to be > > NOCOW, and that "just works". > > The cache is in a separate location from the profiles, as I'm sure you > know. The reason I suggested a separate

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

Am Wed, 1 Nov 2017 02:51:58 -0400 schrieb Dave : > > > >> To reconcile those conflicting goals, the only idea I have come up > >> with so far is to use btrfs send-receive to perform incremental > >> backups > > > > As already said by Romain Mamedov, rsync is viable

Re: Why do full balance and deduplication reduce available free space?

Am Mon, 02 Oct 2017 22:19:32 +0200 schrieb Niccolò Belli <darkba...@linuxsystems.it>: > Il 2017-10-02 21:35 Kai Krakow ha scritto: > > Besides defragging removing the reflinks, duperemove will unshare > > your snapshots when used in this way: If it sees duplicate blocks >

Re: Why do full balance and deduplication reduce available free space?

Am Mon, 02 Oct 2017 12:02:16 +0200 schrieb Niccolò Belli : > This is how I performe balance: btrfs balance start --full-balance > rootfs This is how I perform deduplication (duperemove is from git > master): duperemove -drh --dedupe-options=noblock >

Re: 4.13.3 still has the out of space kernel oops

Am Wed, 27 Sep 2017 00:45:04 +0200 schrieb Ian Kumlien : > I just had my laptop hit the out of space kernel oops which it kinda > hard to recover from > > Everything states "out of disk" even with 20 gigs free (both according > to df and btrfs fi df) You should run

dmesg: csum "varying number" expected csum 0x0 mirror 1 (with trace/oops)

Hello! I came across noting some kernel messages which seem to be related to btrfs, should I worry? I'm currently running scrub on the device now. inode-resolve points to an unimportant, easily recoverable file: $ sudo btrfs inspect-internal inode-resolve -v 1229624

Re: Give up on bcache?

Am Tue, 26 Sep 2017 23:33:19 +0500 schrieb Roman Mamedov : > On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 16:50:00 + (UTC) > Ferry Toth wrote: > > > https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article=linux414-bcache- > > raid=2 > > > > I think it might be idle hopes to think bcache

Re: Btrfs performance with small blocksize on SSD

Am Mon, 25 Sep 2017 07:04:14 + schrieb "Fuhrmann, Carsten" : > Well the correct translation for "Laufzeit" is runtime and not > latency. But thank you for that hint, I'll change it to "gesamt > Laufzeit" to make it more clear. How about better translating it

Re: Btrfs performance with small blocksize on SSD

Am Sun, 24 Sep 2017 19:43:05 +0300 schrieb Andrei Borzenkov : > 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

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Thu, 21 Sep 2017 22:10:13 +0200 schrieb Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com>: > Am Wed, 20 Sep 2017 07:46:52 -0400 > schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferro...@gmail.com>: > > > > Fragmentation: Files with a lot of random writes can become > >

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Wed, 20 Sep 2017 07:46:52 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > > Fragmentation: Files with a lot of random writes can become > > heavily fragmented (1+ extents) causing excessive multi-second > > spikes of CPU load on systems with an SSD or large amount a

Re: SSD caching an existing btrfs raid1

Am Wed, 20 Sep 2017 17:51:15 +0200 schrieb Psalle : > On 19/09/17 17:47, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > (...) > > > > A better option if you can afford to remove a single device from > > that array temporarily is to use bcache.  Bcache has one specific > > advantage in this

Re: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/extent_io.c:1989

Am Mon, 18 Sep 2017 20:30:41 +0200 schrieb Holger Hoffstätte : > On 09/18/17 19:09, Liu Bo wrote: > > This 'mirror 0' looks fishy, (as mirror comes from > > btrfs_io_bio->mirror_num, which should be at least 1 if raid1 setup > > is in use.) > > > > Not sure if

Re: A user cannot remove his readonly snapshots?!

Am Sat, 16 Sep 2017 09:36:33 +0200 schrieb Ulli Horlacher <frams...@rus.uni-stuttgart.de>: > On Sat 2017-09-16 (01:22), Kai Krakow wrote: > > > > tux@xerus:/test/tux/zz/.snapshot: btrfs subvolume delete > > > 2017-09-15_1859.test Delete subvolume (no-commit): >

Re: A user cannot remove his readonly snapshots?!

Am Sat, 16 Sep 2017 00:02:01 +0200 schrieb Ulli Horlacher : > On Fri 2017-09-15 (23:44), Ulli Horlacher wrote: > > On Fri 2017-09-15 (22:07), Peter Grandi wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > > Ordinary permissions still apply both to 'create' and 'delete': > > >

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:11:50 +0200 schrieb Michał Sokołowski : > On 09/15/2017 03:07 PM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > [...] > > Case #1 > > 2x 7200 rpm HDD -> md raid 1 -> host BTRFS rootfs -> qemu cow2 > > storage -> guest BTRFS filesystem > > SQL table row insertions per

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Thu, 14 Sep 2017 18:48:54 +0100 schrieb Tomasz Kłoczko <kloczko.tom...@gmail.com>: > On 14 September 2017 at 16:24, Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com> > wrote: [..] > > Getting e.g. boot files into read order or at least nearby improves > > boot time a lot. Si

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:24:34 +0200 schrieb Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com>: Errors corrected, see below... > Am Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:31:48 +0100 > schrieb Tomasz Kłoczko <kloczko.tom...@gmail.com>: > > > On 14 September 2017 at 12:38, Kai Krakow <h

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:31:48 +0100 schrieb Tomasz Kłoczko <kloczko.tom...@gmail.com>: > On 14 September 2017 at 12:38, Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com> > wrote: [..] > > > > I suggest you only ever defragment parts of your main subvolume or > > rely on au

Re: defragmenting best practice?

Am Tue, 12 Sep 2017 18:28:43 +0200 schrieb Ulli Horlacher : > On Thu 2017-08-31 (09:05), Ulli Horlacher wrote: > > When I do a > > btrfs filesystem defragment -r /directory > > does it defragment really all files in this directory tree, even if > > it contains

Re: Help me understand what is going on with my RAID1 FS

Am Sun, 10 Sep 2017 20:15:52 +0200 schrieb Ferenc-Levente Juhos : > >Problem is that each raid1 block group contains two chunks on two > >separate devices, it can't utilize fully three devices no matter > >what. If that doesn't suit you then you need to add 4th disk. After >

Re: Help me understand what is going on with my RAID1 FS

Am Sun, 10 Sep 2017 15:45:42 +0200 schrieb FLJ : > Hello all, > > I have a BTRFS RAID1 volume running for the past year. I avoided all > pitfalls known to me that would mess up this volume. I never > experimented with quotas, no-COW, snapshots, defrag, nothing really. > The

Re: csum failed root -9

Am Wed, 14 Jun 2017 15:39:50 +0200 schrieb Henk Slager <eye...@gmail.com>: > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Henk Slager <eye...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> Am Mon,

Re: csum failed root -9

Am Mon, 12 Jun 2017 11:00:31 +0200 schrieb Henk Slager : > Hi all, > > there is 1-block corruption a 8TB filesystem that showed up several > months ago. The fs is almost exclusively a btrfs receive target and > receives monthly sequential snapshots from two hosts but 1 received

Re: 4.11.1: cannot btrfs check --repair a filesystem, causes heavy memory stalls

Am Tue, 23 May 2017 07:21:33 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > On 2017-05-22 22:07, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Marc MERLIN > > wrote: > >> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 05:26:25PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > [...] >

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Btrfs: compression must free at least PAGE_SIZE

Am Sat, 20 May 2017 19:49:53 +0300 schrieb Timofey Titovets : > Btrfs already skip store of data where compression didn't free at > least one byte. So make logic better and make check that compression > free at least one PAGE_SIZE, because in another case it useless to >

Re: 4.11 relocate crash, null pointer + rolling back a filesystem by X hours?

> I see. you may hve seen the earlier message from Kai Krakow who was > able to to recover his FS by trying this trick, but I understand it > can't work in all cases. Huh, what trick? I don't take credit for it... ;-) The corrupt-block trick must've been someone else... -- Regards,

Re: Btrfs/SSD

Am Tue, 16 May 2017 14:21:20 +0200 schrieb Tomasz Torcz <to...@pipebreaker.pl>: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 03:58:41AM +0200, Kai Krakow wrote: > > Am Mon, 15 May 2017 22:05:05 +0200 > > schrieb Tomasz Torcz <to...@pipebreaker.pl>: > > > [...] > >

Re: Btrfs/SSD

Am Mon, 15 May 2017 22:05:05 +0200 schrieb Tomasz Torcz <to...@pipebreaker.pl>: > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 09:49:38PM +0200, Kai Krakow wrote: > > > > > It's worth noting also that on average, COW filesystems like BTRFS > > > (or log-structured-fil

Re: Btrfs/SSD

Am Mon, 15 May 2017 08:03:48 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > > That's why I don't trust any of my data to them. But I still want > > the benefit of their speed. So I use SSDs mostly as frontend caches > > to HDDs. This gives me big storage with fast access. Indeed,

Re: Btrfs/SSD

Am Mon, 15 May 2017 07:46:01 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferro...@gmail.com>: > On 2017-05-12 14:27, Kai Krakow wrote: > > Am Tue, 18 Apr 2017 15:02:42 +0200 > > schrieb Imran Geriskovan <imran.gerisko...@gmail.com>: > > > >> On

Re: Btrfs/SSD

Am Mon, 15 May 2017 14:09:20 +0100 schrieb Tomasz Kusmierz : > > Traditional hard drives usually do this too these days (they've > > been under-provisioned since before SSD's existed), which is part > > of why older disks tend to be noisier and slower (the reserved > >

Re: balancing every night broke balancing so now I can't balance anymore?

Am Sun, 14 May 2017 22:57:26 +0200 schrieb Lionel Bouton : > I've coded one Ruby script which tries to balance between the cost of > reallocating group and the need for it. The basic idea is that it > tries to keep the proportion of free space "wasted" by being

Re: balancing every night broke balancing so now I can't balance anymore?

Am Sun, 14 May 2017 13:15:09 -0700 schrieb Marc MERLIN : > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 09:13:35PM +0200, Hans van Kranenburg wrote: > > On 05/13/2017 10:54 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote: > > > Kernel 4.11, btrfs-progs v4.7.3 > > > > > > I run scrub and balance every night, been doing

[OT] SSD performance patterns (was: Btrfs/SSD)

Am Sat, 13 May 2017 09:39:39 + (UTC) schrieb Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net>: > Kai Krakow posted on Fri, 12 May 2017 20:27:56 +0200 as excerpted: > > > In the end, the more continuous blocks of free space there are, the > > better the chance for proper wear leveli

Re: Btrfs/SSD

Am Sat, 13 May 2017 14:52:47 +0500 schrieb Roman Mamedov <r...@romanrm.net>: > On Fri, 12 May 2017 20:36:44 +0200 > Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > My concern is with fail scenarios of some SSDs which die unexpected > > and horribly. I found s

Re: Btrfs/SSD

Am Fri, 12 May 2017 15:02:20 +0200 schrieb Imran Geriskovan : > On 5/12/17, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > > FWIW, I'm in the market for SSDs ATM, and remembered this from a > > couple weeks ago so went back to find it. Thanks. =:^) > > > > (I'm currently

Re: Btrfs/SSD

Am Tue, 18 Apr 2017 15:02:42 +0200 schrieb Imran Geriskovan : > On 4/17/17, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > > Regarding BTRFS specifically: > > * Given my recently newfound understanding of what the 'ssd' mount > > option actually does, I'm

Re: btrfsck lowmem mode shows corruptions

Am Fri, 5 May 2017 08:55:10 +0800 schrieb Qu Wenruo <quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com>: > At 05/05/2017 01:29 AM, Kai Krakow wrote: > > Hello! > > > > Since I saw a few kernel freezes lately (due to experimenting with > > ck-sources) including some filesystem-related b

btrfsck lowmem mode shows corruptions

Hello! Since I saw a few kernel freezes lately (due to experimenting with ck-sources) including some filesystem-related backtraces, I booted my rescue system to check my btrfs filesystem. Luckily, it showed no problems. It said, everything's fine. But I also thought: Okay, let's try lowmem mode.

Re: Can I see what device was used to mount btrfs?

Am Tue, 2 May 2017 21:50:19 +0200 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli : > On 2017-05-02 20:49, Adam Borowski wrote: > >> It could be some daemon that waits for btrfs to become complete. > >> Do we have something? > > Such a daemon would also have to read the chunk tree. > > I

Re: 4.11 relocate crash, null pointer + rolling back a filesystem by X hours?

Am Mon, 1 May 2017 22:56:06 -0600 schrieb Chris Murphy : > On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 9:23 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > > > Thanks for the reply, much appreciated. > > > > On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 07:50:22PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> What

Re: 4.11 relocate crash, null pointer + rolling back a filesystem by X hours?

Am Tue, 2 May 2017 05:01:02 + (UTC) schrieb Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net>: > Of course on-list I'm somewhat known for my arguments propounding the > notion that any filesystem that's too big to be practically > maintained (including time necessary to restore from backups, should > that be

Re: backing up a collection of snapshot subvolumes

Am Tue, 25 Apr 2017 00:02:13 -0400 schrieb "J. Hart" : > I have a remote machine with a filesystem for which I periodically > take incremental snapshots for historical reasons. These snapshots > are stored in an archival filesystem tree on a file server. Older > snapshots

Re: About free space fragmentation, metadata write amplification and (no)ssd

Am Tue, 11 Apr 2017 07:33:41 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > >> FWIW, it is possible to use a udev rule to change the rotational > >> flag from userspace. The kernel's selection algorithm for > >> determining is is somewhat sub-optimal (essentially, if it's not a >

Re: btrfs filesystem keeps allocating new chunks for no apparent reason

Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 15:43:57 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferro...@gmail.com>: > On 2017-04-10 14:18, Kai Krakow wrote: > > Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:13:39 -0400 > > schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferro...@gmail.com>: &

Re: btrfs filesystem keeps allocating new chunks for no apparent reason

Am Tue, 11 Apr 2017 01:45:32 +0200 schrieb "Janos Toth F." : > >> The command-line also rejects a number of perfectly legitimate > >> arguments that BTRFS does understand too though, so that's not much > >> of a test. > > > > Which are those? I didn't encounter any...

Re: btrfs filesystem keeps allocating new chunks for no apparent reason

Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:13:39 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferro...@gmail.com>: > On 2017-04-10 12:54, Kai Krakow wrote: > > Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 18:44:44 +0200 > > schrieb Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com>: > > > >> Am Mon, 10 Apr 20

Re: btrfs filesystem keeps allocating new chunks for no apparent reason

Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 18:44:44 +0200 schrieb Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com>: > Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 08:51:38 -0400 > schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferro...@gmail.com>: > > > On 2017-04-10 08:45, Kai Krakow wrote: > > > Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 08:3

Re: btrfs filesystem keeps allocating new chunks for no apparent reason

Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 08:51:38 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferro...@gmail.com>: > On 2017-04-10 08:45, Kai Krakow wrote: > > Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 08:39:23 -0400 > > schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferro...@gmail.com>: > > >

Re: btrfs filesystem keeps allocating new chunks for no apparent reason

Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 08:39:23 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > They've been running BTRFS > with LZO compression, the SSD allocator, atime disabled, and mtime > updates deferred (lazytime mount option) the whole time, so it may be > a slightly different use case

Re: About free space fragmentation, metadata write amplification and (no)ssd

Am Sun, 9 Apr 2017 02:21:19 +0200 schrieb Hans van Kranenburg : > On 04/08/2017 11:55 PM, Peter Grandi wrote: > >> [ ... ] This post is way too long [ ... ] > > > > Many thanks for your report, it is really useful, especially the > > details. > > Thanks! > >

Re: Shrinking a device - performance?

Am Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:06:46 +0500 schrieb Roman Mamedov : > On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:49:47 +0200 > Christian Theune wrote: > > > Also: the idea of migrating on btrfs also has its downside - the > > performance of “mkdir” and “fsync” is abysmal at the

Re: backing up a file server with many subvolumes

Am Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:57:17 +0300 schrieb Marat Khalili : > Just some consideration, since I've faced similar but no exactly same > problem: use rsync, but create snapshots on target machine. Blind > rsync will destroy deduplication of your snapshots and take huge > amount of

Re: backing up a file server with many subvolumes

Am Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:53:17 -0400 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > > I'd like to try to back up (duplicate) the file server filesystem > > containing these snapshot subvolumes for each remote machine. The > > problem is that I don't think I can use send/receive to do

Re: Confusion about snapshots containers

Am Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:27:30 -0500 schrieb Tim Cuthbertson : > I have recently switched from multiple partitions with multiple > btrfs's to a flat layout. I will try to keep my question concise. > > I am confused as to whether a snapshots container should be a normal >

Re: Home storage with btrfs

Am Wed, 15 Mar 2017 23:26:32 +0100 schrieb Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com>: > Well, bugs can hit you with every filesystem. Nothing as complex as a Meh... I fooled myself. Find the mistake... ;-) SPOILER: "Nothing" should be "something". -- Regards, Kai R

Re: Home storage with btrfs

Am Wed, 15 Mar 2017 23:41:41 +0100 schrieb Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com>: > Am Wed, 15 Mar 2017 23:26:32 +0100 > schrieb Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com>: > > > Well, bugs can hit you with every filesystem. Nothing as complex as > > a > > M

Re: Home storage with btrfs

Am Wed, 15 Mar 2017 07:55:51 + (UTC) schrieb Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net>: > Hérikz Nawarro posted on Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:29:32 -0300 as excerpted: > > > Today is safe to use btrfs for home storage? No raid, just secure > > storage for some files and create snapshots from it. > > > I'll

Re: Hard crash on 4.9.5

Am Sat, 28 Jan 2017 15:50:38 -0500 schrieb Matt McKinnon : > This same file system (which crashed again with the same errors) is > also giving this output during a metadata or data balance: This looks somewhat familiar to the err=-17 that I am experiencing when using

Re: raid1 degraded mount still produce single chunks, writeable mount not allowed

Am Fri, 3 Mar 2017 07:19:06 -0500 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferro...@gmail.com>: > On 2017-03-03 00:56, Kai Krakow wrote: > > Am Thu, 2 Mar 2017 11:37:53 +0100 > > schrieb Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl>: > > > >> On Wed,

Re: raid1 degraded mount still produce single chunks, writeable mount not allowed

Am Thu, 2 Mar 2017 11:37:53 +0100 schrieb Adam Borowski : > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 05:30:37PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > > [1717713.408675] BTRFS warning (device dm-8): missing devices (1) > > exceeds the limit (0), writeable mount is not allowed > > [1717713.446453] BTRFS

Re: Please add more info to dmesg output on I/O error

Am Wed, 1 Mar 2017 19:04:26 +0300 schrieb Timofey Titovets : > Hi, today i try move my FS from old HDD to new SSD > While processing i catch I/O error and device remove operation was > canceled > > Dmesg: > [ 1015.010241] blk_update_request: I/O error, dev sda, sector

Re: [4.7.2] btrfs_run_delayed_refs:2963: errno=-17 Object already exists

Am Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:52:48 +0100 schrieb Marc Joliet : > Hi again, > > so, it seems that I've solved the problem: After having to > umount/mount the FS several times to get btrfs-cleaner to finish, I > thought of the "failed to load free space [...], rebuilding it now" > type

Re: [4.7.2] btrfs_run_delayed_refs:2963: errno=-17 Object already exists

Am Fri, 10 Feb 2017 23:15:03 +0100 schrieb Marc Joliet : > # btrfs filesystem df /media/MARCEC_BACKUP/ > Data, single: total=851.00GiB, used=831.36GiB > System, DUP: total=64.00MiB, used=120.00KiB > Metadata, DUP: total=13.00GiB, used=10.38GiB > Metadata, single: total=1.12GiB,

Re: BTRFS and cyrus mail server

Am Wed, 08 Feb 2017 19:38:06 +0100 schrieb Libor Klepáč : > Hello, > inspired by recent discussion on BTRFS vs. databases i wanted to ask > on suitability of BTRFS for hosting a Cyrus imap server spool. I > haven't found any recent article on this topic. > > I'm preparing

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: better document btrfs receive security

Am Fri, 3 Feb 2017 08:48:58 -0500 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > +user who is running receive, and then move then into the final > destination Typo? s/then/them/? -- Regards, Kai Replies to list-only preferred. -- To unsubscribe

Re: dup vs raid1 in single disk

Am Thu, 19 Jan 2017 15:02:14 -0500 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > On 2017-01-19 13:23, Roman Mamedov wrote: > > On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 17:39:37 +0100 > > "Alejandro R. Mosteo" wrote: > > > >> I was wondering, from a point of view of data safety, if

Re: BTRFS for OLTP Databases

Am Tue, 7 Feb 2017 22:25:29 +0100 schrieb Lionel Bouton <lionel-subscript...@bouton.name>: > Le 07/02/2017 à 21:47, Austin S. Hemmelgarn a écrit : > > On 2017-02-07 15:36, Kai Krakow wrote: > >> Am Tue, 7 Feb 2017 09:13:25 -0500 > >> schrie

Re: BTRFS for OLTP Databases

Am Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:43:11 -0500 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > > I mean that: > > You have a 128MB extent, you rewrite random 4k sectors, btrfs will > > not split 128MB extent, and not free up data, (i don't know > > internal algo, so i can't predict when this will

Re: BTRFS for OLTP Databases

Am Tue, 7 Feb 2017 15:27:34 -0500 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > >> I'm not sure about this one. I would assume based on the fact that > >> many other things don't work with nodatacow and that regular defrag > >> doesn't work on files which are currently mapped as

Re: BTRFS for OLTP Databases

Am Tue, 7 Feb 2017 09:13:25 -0500 schrieb Peter Zaitsev : > Hi Hugo, > > For the use case I'm looking for I'm interested in having snapshot(s) > open at all time. Imagine for example snapshot being created every > hour and several of these snapshots kept at all time

Re: BTRFS for OLTP Databases

Am Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:50:04 -0500 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > > Also does autodefrag works with nodatacow (ie with snapshot) or > > are these exclusive ? > I'm not sure about this one. I would assume based on the fact that > many other things don't work with

Re: BTRFS for OLTP Databases

Am Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:06:34 -0500 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > 4. Try using in-line compression. This can actually significantly > improve performance, especially if you have slow storage devices and > a really nice CPU. Just a side note: With nodatacow there'll be

Re: Very slow balance / btrfs-transaction

Am Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:19:37 -0500 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > > MDRAID uses stripe selection based on latency and other measurements > > (like head position). It would be nice if btrfs implemented similar > > functionality. This would also be helpful for selecting a

Re: btrfs receive leaves new subvolume modifiable during operation

Am Mon, 6 Feb 2017 07:30:31 -0500 schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" : > > How about mounting the receiver below a directory only traversable > > by root (chmod og-rwx)? Backups shouldn't be directly accessible by > > ordinary users anyway. > There are perfectly legitimate

Re: Is it possible to have metadata-only device with no data?

Am Mon, 06 Feb 2017 00:42:01 +0300 schrieb Alexander Tomokhov : > Is it possible, having two drives to do raid1 for metadata but keep > data on a single drive only? -- No, but you could take a look into bcache which should get you something similar if used in write-around mode.

Re: btrfs receive leaves new subvolume modifiable during operation

Am Thu, 2 Feb 2017 10:52:26 + schrieb Graham Cobb : > On 02/02/17 00:02, Duncan wrote: > > If it's a workaround, then many of the Linux procedures we as > > admins and users use every day are equally workarounds. Setting > > 007 perms on a dir that doesn't have anything

Re: btrfs receive leaves new subvolume modifiable during operation

Am Wed, 1 Feb 2017 17:43:32 + schrieb Graham Cobb : > On 01/02/17 12:28, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > > On 2017-02-01 00:09, Duncan wrote: > >> Christian Lupien posted on Tue, 31 Jan 2017 18:32:58 -0500 as > >> excerpted: > [...] > >> > >> I'm just a btrfs-using

Re: Very slow balance / btrfs-transaction

Am Sat, 04 Feb 2017 20:50:03 + schrieb "Jorg Bornschein" : > February 4, 2017 1:07 AM, "Goldwyn Rodrigues" > wrote: > > > Yes, please check if disabling quotas makes a difference in > > execution time of btrfs balance. > > Just FYI: With quotas disabled

Re: [4.7.2] btrfs_run_delayed_refs:2963: errno=-17 Object already exists

Am Thu, 02 Feb 2017 13:01:03 +0100 schrieb Marc Joliet <mar...@gmx.de>: > On Sunday 28 August 2016 15:29:08 Kai Krakow wrote: > > Hello list! > > Hi list > > > It happened again. While using VirtualBox the following crash > > happened, btrfs check fou

Re: mount option nodatacow for VMs on SSD?

Am Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:38:29 +0100 schrieb Ulli Horlacher <frams...@rus.uni-stuttgart.de>: > On Sat 2016-11-26 (11:27), Kai Krakow wrote: > > > > I have vmware and virtualbox VMs on btrfs SSD. > > > As a side note: I don't think you can use "nodataco

Re: mount option nodatacow for VMs on SSD?

Am Fri, 25 Nov 2016 09:28:40 +0100 schrieb Ulli Horlacher : > I have vmware and virtualbox VMs on btrfs SSD. > > I read in > https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/SysadminGuide#When_To_Make_Subvolumes > > certain types of data (databases, VM images and

Re: corrupt leaf, slot offset bad

Am Tue, 11 Oct 2016 07:09:49 -0700 schrieb Liu Bo : > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 02:48:09PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > > Hi, > > > > looks like a lot of random bitflips. > > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 11:50:14PM +0200, a...@aron.ws wrote: > > > item 109 has a few strange

  1   2   3   4   >