On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 12:10:34PM +0500, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 17:06:22 -0600
> Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> > Right. The block device (partition containing the Btrfs file system)
> > must be exclusively used by one kernel, host or guest. Dom0 or DomU.
> > Can't be both.
> >
> >
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 17:06:22 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> Right. The block device (partition containing the Btrfs file system)
> must be exclusively used by one kernel, host or guest. Dom0 or DomU.
> Can't be both.
>
> The only exception I'm aware of is virtiofs or virtio-9p, but I
> haven't mess
On 11.04.2021 02:06, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Right. The block device (partition containing the Btrfs file system)
> must be exclusively used by one kernel, host or guest. Dom0 or DomU.
> Can't be both.
>
> The only exception I'm aware of is virtiofs or virtio-9p, but I
> haven't messed with that stu
On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 8:49 AM Roman Mamedov wrote:
>
> On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 13:38:57 +
> Paul Leiber wrote:
>
> > d) Perhaps the complete BTRFS setup (Xen, VMs, pass through the partition,
> > Samba share) is flawed?
>
> I kept reading and reading to find where you say you unmounted in on t
Von: Roman Mamedov
Gesendet: Samstag, 10. April 2021 16:49
>
> On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 13:38:57 +
> Paul Leiber wrote:
>
> > e) Perhaps it is wrong to mount the BTRFS root first in the Dom0 and then
> accessing the subvolumes in the DomU?
>
> Absolutely O.o
>
> Subvolumes are very much like d
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 13:38:57 +
Paul Leiber wrote:
> d) Perhaps the complete BTRFS setup (Xen, VMs, pass through the partition,
> Samba share) is flawed?
I kept reading and reading to find where you say you unmounted in on the host,
and then... :)
> e) Perhaps it is wrong to mount the BTRFS
arity 1
[59527.223482] Already setup the GSI :18
[80158.969832] BTRFS info (device sda1): disk space caching is enabled
[80158.969834] BTRFS info (device sda1): has skinny extents
[80159.077386] BTRFS error (device sda1): parent transid verify failed on
30982144 wanted 15 found 707
[80159.087265] BTRF
> Gesendet: Montag, 29. März 2021 um 13:36 Uhr
> Von: "Josef Bacik"
> An: "B A" , "Chris Murphy" ,
> "btrfs kernel mailing list"
> Cc: "Qu Wenruo"
> Betreff: Re: Aw: Re: Re: Help needed with filesystem errors: parent tr
Hi Chris,
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. März 2021 um 20:17 Uhr
> Von: "Chris Murphy"
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 2:44 AM B A wrote:
> >
> > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. März 2021 um 00:07 Uhr
> > > Von: "Chris Murphy"
> > > […]
> > > EVO or PRO? And what does its /proc/mounts line look like?
> >
> > M
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 2:44 AM B A wrote:
>
>
> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. März 2021 um 00:07 Uhr
> > Von: "Chris Murphy"
> > An: "B A"
> > Cc: "Btrfs BTRFS"
> > Betreff: Re: Help needed with filesystem errors: parent tran
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. März 2021 um 00:07 Uhr
> Von: "Chris Murphy"
> An: "B A"
> Cc: "Btrfs BTRFS"
> Betreff: Re: Help needed with filesystem errors: parent transid verify failed
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 9:41 AM B A wrote:
>
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 9:41 AM B A wrote:
>
> * Samsung 840 series SSD (SMART data looks fine)
EVO or PRO? And what does its /proc/mounts line look like?
Total_LBAs_Written?
--
Chris Murphy
On 3/29/21 4:42 AM, B A wrote:
Gesendet: Montag, 29. März 2021 um 08:09 Uhr
Von: "Chris Murphy"
An: "B A" , "Btrfs BTRFS"
Cc: "Qu Wenruo" , "Josef Bacik"
Betreff: Re: Re: Help needed with filesystem errors: parent transid verify
failed
[…]
> Gesendet: Montag, 29. März 2021 um 08:09 Uhr
> Von: "Chris Murphy"
> An: "B A" , "Btrfs BTRFS"
> Cc: "Qu Wenruo" , "Josef Bacik"
> Betreff: Re: Re: Help needed with filesystem errors: parent transid verify
> failed
>
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 1:34 AM B A wrote:
>
> This is a very old BTRFS filesystem created with Fedora *23* i.e. a linux
> kernel and btrfs-progs around version 4.2. It was probably created 2015-10-31
> with Fedora 23 beta and kernel 4.2.4 or 4.2.5.
>
> I ran `btrfs scrub` about a month ago with
> Gesendet: Montag, 29. März 2021 um 01:02 Uhr
> Von: "Chris Murphy"
> An: "B A"
> Cc: "Btrfs BTRFS"
> Betreff: Re: Help needed with filesystem errors: parent transid verify failed
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 9:41 AM B A wrote:
> >
>
> Gesendet: Montag, 29. März 2021 um 01:02 Uhr
> Von: "Chris Murphy"
> An: "B A"
> Cc: "Btrfs BTRFS"
> Betreff: Re: Help needed with filesystem errors: parent transid verify failed
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 9:41 AM B A wrote:
> >
>
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 7:02 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> Can you post the output from both:
>
> btrfs insp dump-t -b 1144783093760 /dev/dm-0
> btrfs insp dump-t -b 1144881201152 /dev/dm-0
I'm not sure if those dumps will contain filenames, so check them.
It's ok to remove filenames before posting
o due to errors. This is
> the dmesg output at that time:
>
> > [ 616.155392] BTRFS error (device dm-0): parent transid verify failed on
> > 1144783093760 wanted 2734307 found 2734305
> > [ 616.155650] BTRFS error (device dm-0): parent transid verify failed on
&
392] BTRFS error (device dm-0): parent transid verify failed on
> 1144783093760 wanted 2734307 found 2734305
> [ 616.155650] BTRFS error (device dm-0): parent transid verify failed on
> 1144783093760 wanted 2734307 found 2734305
> [ 616.155657] BTRFS: error (device dm-0) in __btrfs_f
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 12:50 AM Dave T wrote:
>
> > d. Just skip the testing and try usebackuproot with a read-write
> > mount. It might make things worse, but at least it's fast to test. If
> > it messes things up, you'll have to recreate this backup from scratch.
>
> I took this approach. My co
> > > > # btrfs check -r 2853787942912 /dev/mapper/xyz
> > > > Opening filesystem to check...
> > > > parent transid verify failed on 2853787942912 wanted 29436 found 29433
> > > > parent transid verify failed on 2853787942912 wanted 29436 found 29433
&
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 12:32 AM Dave T wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 2:03 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:54 PM Dave T wrote:
> > >
> > > # btrfs check -r 2853787942912 /dev/mapper/xyz
> > > Opening filesystem to c
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 2:03 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:54 PM Dave T wrote:
> >
> > # btrfs check -r 2853787942912 /dev/mapper/xyz
> > Opening filesystem to check...
> > parent transid verify failed on 2853787942912 wanted 29436 found 2
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:54 PM Dave T wrote:
>
> # btrfs check -r 2853787942912 /dev/mapper/xyz
> Opening filesystem to check...
> parent transid verify failed on 2853787942912 wanted 29436 found 29433
> parent transid verify failed on 2853787942912 wanted 29436 found 29433
&
t losing my
> > backups.
> >
> > Next step I did:
> >
> > # btrfs check /dev/mapper/xyz
> > Opening filesystem to check...
> > parent transid verify failed on 2853827608576 wanted 29436 found
> > 29433
> > p
ckup
>
> This is my backup disk (5TB), and I don't have another 5TB disk to
> copy all the data to. I hope I can fix the issue without losing my
> backups.
>
> Next step I did:
>
> # btrfs check /dev/mapper/xyz
> Opening filesystem to check...
>
e issue without losing my
backups.
Next step I did:
# btrfs check /dev/mapper/xyz
Opening filesystem to check...
parent transid verify failed on 2853827608576 wanted 29436 found 29433
parent transid verify failed on 2853827608576 wanted 29436 found 29433
ckup
>
> This is my backup disk (5TB), and I don't have another 5TB disk to
> copy all the data to. I hope I can fix the issue without losing my
> backups.
>
> Next step I did:
>
> # btrfs check /dev/mapper/xyz
> Opening filesystem to check...
>
ath /dev/sdd
> >
> > mounting with usebackuproot and rescue=skip_bg results in
> > [ 1088.130629] BTRFS info (device sdc): trying to use backup root at mount
> > time
> > [ 1088.130633] BTRFS info (device sdc): disk space caching is enabled
> > [ 1088.130635
g results in
> [ 1088.130629] BTRFS info (device sdc): trying to use backup root at mount
> time
> [ 1088.130633] BTRFS info (device sdc): disk space caching is enabled
> [ 1088.130635] BTRFS info (device sdc): has skinny extents
> [ 1088.135907] BTRFS error (device sdc): parent transid verif
> mounting with usebackuproot and rescue=skip_bg results in
> [ 1088.130629] BTRFS info (device sdc): trying to use backup root at mount
> time
> [ 1088.130633] BTRFS info (device sdc): disk space caching is enabled
> [ 1088.130635] BTRFS info (device sdc): has skinny extents
> [
ice sdc): has skinny extents
[ 1088.135907] BTRFS error (device sdc): parent transid verify failed
on 30425088 wanted 18663 found 18664
[ 1088.151587] BTRFS error (device sdc): parent transid verify failed
on 30425088 wanted 18663 found 18664
[ 1088.151605] BTRFS warning (device sdc): failed to read r
nt:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > # mount -o ro,usebackuproot /dev/sdc1 /mnt
>> >>> > mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sdc1,
>> >>> > missing codepage or helper program, or
- try
>>> >dmesg | tail or so.
>>> >
>>> > Kernel messages from the mount attempt:
>>> >
>>> > [Thu Aug 15 08:47:42 2019] BTRFS info (device sdc1): trying to use
>>> backup root at mount time
>
ernel messages from the mount attempt:
>> >
>> > [Thu Aug 15 08:47:42 2019] BTRFS info (device sdc1): trying to use
>> backup root at mount time
>> > [Thu Aug 15 08:47:42 2019] BTRFS info (device sdc1): disk space
>> caching is enabled
>>
kinny extents
> [Thu Aug 15 08:47:42 2019] BTRFS error (device sdc1): parent transid verify
> failed on 229846466560 wanted 49749 found 49750
> [Thu Aug 15 08:47:42 2019] BTRFS error (device sdc1): parent transid verify
> failed on 229846466560 wanted 49749 found 49750
> [Thu Aug 1
Also - here's 'btrfs inspect-internal dump-super /dev/sdc1':
superblock: bytenr=65536, device=/dev/sdc1
-
csum_type 0 (crc32c)
csum_size 4
csum 0x4331039b [match]
bytenr 65536
flags 0x1
( WRITTEN )
magic _BHRfS_M [
e
[Thu Aug 15 08:47:42 2019] BTRFS info (device sdc1): disk space caching is
enabled
[Thu Aug 15 08:47:42 2019] BTRFS info (device sdc1): has skinny extents
[Thu Aug 15 08:47:42 2019] BTRFS error (device sdc1): parent transid verify
failed on 229846466560 wanted 49749 found 49750
[Thu Aug 15 08:
On 2019/8/15 上午2:32, Tim Walberg wrote:
> Most of the recommendations I've found online deal with when "wanted" is
> greater than "found", which, if I understand correctly means that one or
> more transactions were interrupted/lost before fully committed.
No matter what the case is, a proper tra
Most of the recommendations I've found online deal with when "wanted" is
greater than "found", which, if I understand correctly means that one or
more transactions were interrupted/lost before fully committed.
Are the recommendations for recovery the same if the system is reporting a
"wanted" that
0:25AM -0400, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
>>>>> On 4.14.x and 4.20.14 kernels (probably all the ones in between too,
>>>>> but I haven't tested those), I get what I call "ghost parent transid
>>>>> verify failed" errors. Here's an unedited rece
nd 4.20.14 kernels (probably all the ones in between too,
> >>> but I haven't tested those), I get what I call "ghost parent transid
> >>> verify failed" errors. Here's an unedited recent example from dmesg:
> >>>
> >>> [16180.649285
tested those), I get what I call "ghost parent transid
>>> verify failed" errors. Here's an unedited recent example from dmesg:
>>>
>>> [16180.649285] BTRFS error (device dm-3): parent transid verify failed
>>> on 1218181971968 wanted 9698 foun
On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 10:47:16AM -0400, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 12:00:25AM -0400, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
> > On 4.14.x and 4.20.14 kernels (probably all the ones in between too,
> > but I haven't tested those), I get what I call "ghost parent transid
Dear Dennis,
Without the bcache cache device, I was able to mount the file system (
root ) for read-only. I recreated it on the same LVM volume, and
rsync-ed the files. The files I lost (i/o error because checksum error)
was not important. Your case might be different. But without the cache,
Dear Szalma!
Thank you for the information.
On Dienstag, 28. Mai 2019 08:40:40 CEST Szalma László wrote:
> I experienced the same, the problem is with bcache + gcc9. Immediately
> remove the cache device from the bcache, as it prevents more damages to
> your filesystem. After it downgrade gcc to
vid 1 transid 840641 /dev/bcache0
> > [T599] BTRFS info (device bcache0): disk space caching is enabled
> > [T599] BTRFS info (device bcache0): has skinny extents
> > [T599] BTRFS error (device bcache0): parent transid verify failed on
> > 604602368 wanted 840641 found 8406
ransid 840641 /dev/bcache0
[T599] BTRFS info (device bcache0): disk space caching is enabled
[T599] BTRFS info (device bcache0): has skinny extents
[T599] BTRFS error (device bcache0): parent transid verify failed on 604602368
wanted 840641 found 840639
[T599] BTRFS error (device bcache0): open_ctree
led
> [T599] BTRFS info (device bcache0): has skinny extents
> [T599] BTRFS error (device bcache0): parent transid verify failed on 604602368
> wanted 840641 found 840639
> [T599] BTRFS error (device bcache0): open_ctree failed
>
> How can I recover from this?
>
> The files
. The next
boot stopped early with following message:
[T445] BTRFS: device label <...> devid 1 transid 840641 /dev/bcache0
[T599] BTRFS info (device bcache0): disk space caching is enabled
[T599] BTRFS info (device bcache0): has skinny extents
[T599] BTRFS error (device bcache0): parent transid
between too,
> > but I haven't tested those), I get what I call "ghost parent transid
> > verify failed" errors. Here's an unedited recent example from dmesg:
> >
> > [16180.649285] BTRFS error (device dm-3): parent transid verify
> > f
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 12:00:25AM -0400, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
> On 4.14.x and 4.20.14 kernels (probably all the ones in between too,
> but I haven't tested those), I get what I call "ghost parent transid
> verify failed" errors. Here's an unedi
26.03.2019 1:26, berodual_xyz пишет:
> Dear all,
>
> on a large btrfs based filesystem (multi-device raid0 - all devices okay,
> nodatacow,nodatasum...) I experienced severe filesystem corruption, most
> likely due to a hard reset with inflight data.
> The system cannot mount (also not with "ro,
es used 54.91TiB
devid1 size 21.83TiB used 13.75TiB path /dev/sdb
devid2 size 21.83TiB used 13.75TiB path /dev/sdc
devid3 size 21.83TiB used 13.75TiB path /dev/sdd
devid4 size 21.83TiB used 13.75TiB path /dev/sde
##
$ btrfs check --readonly /dev/sdd
e filesystem, not just one
device. The device just serves to identify which FS you're running it
on. (The btrfs check code will scan all the available block devices
for the other pieces of the FS).
Hugo.
> ##
> $ btrfs check --readonly /dev/sdd
> Opening filesystem to check...
&
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:44:15PM +, berodual_xyz wrote:
> Thank you very much Hugo,
>
> the underlying devices are based on HW raid6 and effectively "stitched"
> together. Loosing any of those would mean loosing all data, so much is clear.
>
> My concern was not so much bitrod / silent dat
Running "btrfs check" on the 3rd of the 4 devices the volume consists of
crashes with a trace:
##
$ btrfs check --readonly /dev/sdd
Opening filesystem to check...
parent transid verify failed on 1048576 wanted 60234 found 60230
parent transid verify failed on 1048576 wanted 60234 f
7;t either.
> Running "btrfs restore" I got a reasonable amount of data backed up, but a
> large chunk is missing.
>
> "btrfs check" gives the following error:
>
> ##
> $ btrfs check -b /dev/sdd
> Opening filesystem to check...
> parent transid verify
uot; etc.).
Running "btrfs restore" I got a reasonable amount of data backed up, but a
large chunk is missing.
"btrfs check" gives the following error:
##
$ btrfs check -b /dev/sdd
Opening filesystem to check...
parent transid verify failed on 1048576 wanted 60234 found 60230
jobs before a balance.
Jorge
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 4:03 AM Zygo Blaxell
wrote:
>
> On 4.14.x and 4.20.14 kernels (probably all the ones in between too,
> but I haven't tested those), I get what I call "ghost parent transid
> verify failed" errors. Here's
On 4.14.x and 4.20.14 kernels (probably all the ones in between too,
but I haven't tested those), I get what I call "ghost parent transid
verify failed" errors. Here's an unedited recent example from dmesg:
[16180.649285] BTRFS error (device dm-3): parent trans
dm-3): has skinny extents
May 11 07:58:33 [kernel] BTRFS error (device dm-3): parent transid verify failed
on 541635395584 wanted 10388 found 10385
This is the last part of btrfs check --repair (I know, highly experimental, but
I didn't get an alternative solution on #btrfs) :
rent transid ver
trfsck --mode=lowmem from
current Tumbleweed snapshot runs for half an hour now with never-ending
same message.
Would you please provide the size of the fs?
lowmem mode is indeed slow, as it doesn't use much memory so it will do
tons of tree search instead, which will cause tons of same "
This is VM under QEMU/KVM running openSUSE Tumbleweed. I boot it
infrequently for short time to test something. Last time it installed
quite a lot of updates including kernel (I think 4.9.11 was the last
version); I do not remember whether I rebooted it after that. Today I
booted it to check someth
Hi
I am getting some "parent transid verify failed"-errors. Is there any
way to find out what's affected? Are these errors in metadata, data or
both - and if they are errors in the data: How can I find out which
files are affected?
Regards,
Tobias
--
To unsubscribe from this list
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 20:48:47 +0500
Roman Mamedov wrote:
> The system was seemingly running just fine for days or weeks, then I
> routinely deleted a bunch of old snapshots, and suddenly got hit with:
>
> [Sat Mar 12 20:17:10 2016] BTRFS error (device dm-0): parent transid verify
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 15:52:52 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> I really think you need a minute's worth of kernel messages prior to
> that time stamp.
There was no messages a minute, or even (from memory) many hours prior to the
crash. If there was something even remotely weird or block-device or
FS-r
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 14:10:47 -0600
> Chris Murphy wrote:
>
>> I'm going to guess it's a metadata block, and the profile is single.
>> Otherwise, if it were data it'd just be a corrupt file and you'd be
>> told which one is affected. And if m
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 14:10:47 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> I'm going to guess it's a metadata block, and the profile is single.
> Otherwise, if it were data it'd just be a corrupt file and you'd be
> told which one is affected. And if metadata had more than one copy,
> then it should recover from t
MT-03:00 Roman Mamedov :
> Hello,
>
> The system was seemingly running just fine for days or weeks, then I
> routinely deleted a bunch of old snapshots, and suddenly got hit with:
>
> [Sat Mar 12 20:17:10 2016] BTRFS error (device dm-0): parent transid verify
> failed on 7483566
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
>
> "Blowing away" a 6TB filesystem just because some block randomly went "bad",
I'm going to guess it's a metadata block, and the profile is single.
Otherwise, if it were data it'd just be a corrupt file and you'd be
told which one is affec
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 17:03:54 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> With backups I'd try it, if only for the personal experience value and to
> see what the result was. But that's certainly more intensive "surgery"
> on the filesystem than --repair, and I'd only do it either for tha
Roman Mamedov posted on Sun, 13 Mar 2016 14:24:28 +0500 as excerpted:
> With "Errors found in extent allocation tree", I wonder if I should try
> --init-extent-tree next.
With backups I'd try it, if only for the personal experience value and to
see what the result was. But that's certainly more
b6f-bb85-3f2df2f63c99
checking extents
parent transid verify failed on 7483566862336 wanted 410578 found 404133
parent transid verify failed on 7483566862336 wanted 410578 found 404133
parent transid verify failed on 7483566862336 wanted 410578 found 404133
parent transid verify failed on 7483566862
Roman Mamedov posted on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 20:48:47 +0500 as excerpted:
> I wonder what's the best way to proceed here. Maybe try btrfs-zero-log?
> But the difference between transid numbers of 6 thousands is concerning.
btrfs-zero-log is a very specific tool designed to fix a very specific
proble
Hello,
btrfsck output:
# btrfsck /dev/alpha/lv1
Checking filesystem on /dev/alpha/lv1
UUID: 8cf8eff9-fd5a-4b6f-bb85-3f2df2f63c99
checking extents
parent transid verify failed on 7483566862336 wanted 410578 found 404133
parent transid verify failed on 7483566862336 wanted 410578 found 404133
Hello,
The system was seemingly running just fine for days or weeks, then I
routinely deleted a bunch of old snapshots, and suddenly got hit with:
[Sat Mar 12 20:17:10 2016] BTRFS error (device dm-0): parent transid verify
failed on 7483566862336 wanted 410578 found 404133
[Sat Mar 12 20:17:10
On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 10:19:41AM +, Duncan wrote:
> Alistair Grant posted on Wed, 09 Dec 2015 09:38:47 +1100 as excerpted:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:25:14PM +, Duncan wrote:
> > Thanks again Duncan for your assistance.
> >
> > I plugged the ext4 drive I planned to use for the rec
Alistair Grant posted on Wed, 09 Dec 2015 09:38:47 +1100 as excerpted:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:25:14PM +, Duncan wrote:
>> Alistair Grant posted on Tue, 08 Dec 2015 06:55:04 +1100 as excerpted:
>>
>> > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 01:48:47PM +, Duncan wrote:
>> >> Alistair Grant posted on
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:25:14PM +, Duncan wrote:
> Alistair Grant posted on Tue, 08 Dec 2015 06:55:04 +1100 as excerpted:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 01:48:47PM +, Duncan wrote:
> >> Alistair Grant posted on Mon, 07 Dec 2015 21:02:56 +1100 as excerpted:
> >>
> >> > I think I'll try t
Alistair Grant posted on Tue, 08 Dec 2015 06:55:04 +1100 as excerpted:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 01:48:47PM +, Duncan wrote:
>> Alistair Grant posted on Mon, 07 Dec 2015 21:02:56 +1100 as excerpted:
>>
>> > I think I'll try the btrfs restore as a learning exercise, and to
>> > check the conte
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 01:48:47PM +, Duncan wrote:
> Alistair Grant posted on Mon, 07 Dec 2015 21:02:56 +1100 as excerpted:
>
> > I think I'll try the btrfs restore as a learning exercise, and to check
> > the contents of my backup (I don't trust my memory, so something could
> > have changed
Alistair Grant posted on Mon, 07 Dec 2015 21:02:56 +1100 as excerpted:
> I think I'll try the btrfs restore as a learning exercise, and to check
> the contents of my backup (I don't trust my memory, so something could
> have changed since the last backup).
Trying btrfs restore is an excellent ide
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 08:25:01AM +, Duncan wrote:
> Alistair Grant posted on Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:57:15 +1100 as excerpted:
>
> > I've ran btrfs scrub and btrfsck on the drives, with the output included
> > below. Based on what I've found on the web, I assume that a
> > btrfs-zero-log is req
Alistair Grant posted on Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:57:15 +1100 as excerpted:
> I've ran btrfs scrub and btrfsck on the drives, with the output included
> below. Based on what I've found on the web, I assume that a
> btrfs-zero-log is required.
>
> * Is this the recommended path?
[Just replying to a c
On 12/07/2015 02:57 PM, Alistair Grant wrote as excerpted:
> Fixing recursive fault, but reboot is needed
For the record:
I saw the same message (incl. hard lockup) when doing a balance on a
single-disk btrfs.
Besides that, the fs works flawlessly (~60GB, usage: no snapshots, ~15
lxc containers,
Hi,
(Resending as it looks like the first attempt didn't get through,
probably too large, so logs are now in dropbox)
I have a btrfs volume which is raid1 across two spinning rust disks,
each 2TB.
When trying to access some files from a another machine using sshfs the
server machine has crashed
BTRFS (device sda): parent transid verify failed on
427084513280 wanted 390924 found 390922
[ 121.861607] BTRFS (device sda): parent transid verify failed on
427084513280 wanted 390924 found 390922
[ 121.861715] BTRFS: failed to read tree root on sda
[ 121.878111] BTRFS: open_ctree failed
btrfs-progs
: disk space caching is enabled [
> 121.857820] BTRFS (device sda): parent transid verify failed on
> 427084513280 wanted 390924 found 390922 [ 121.861607] BTRFS (device
> sda):
> parent transid verify failed on 427084513280 wanted 390924 found 390922
> [ 121.861715] BTRFS: failed
2015-08-08 21:05 GMT+02:00 Hugo Mills :
>> Maybe someone can give some clues why does this happen in the first
>> place? Is it unfortunate timing due to the abrupt power cycle?
>> Shouldn't CoW protect against this somewhat?
>
>Not "somewhat": it should protect it completely. There are two ways
e caching is enabled
> [ 121.857820] BTRFS (device sda): parent transid verify failed on
> 427084513280 wanted 390924 found 390922
> [ 121.861607] BTRFS (device sda): parent transid verify failed on
> 427084513280 wanted 390924 found 390922
> [ 121.861715] BTRFS: failed to read tree
Hi, after a hard reboot (powercycle) a btrfs volume did not come up again:
It's a single 4TB disk - only btrfs with lzo - data=single,metadata=dup
[ 121.831814] BTRFS info (device sda): disk space caching is enabled
[ 121.857820] BTRFS (device sda): parent transid verify failed on
4270845
I am running kernel 4.0 and btrfs-prog mainline. I have a backup.
Of the following commands:
btrfs check —repair device
btrfsck —repair device
mount -t btrfs -o recovery device mount && btrfs scrub start mount
--none of them remove the "parent transid verify failed” errors from t
: detected SSD devices, enabling SSD mode
[ 106.578440] BTRFS: checking UUID tree
[ 106.581198] parent transid verify failed on 168079851520 wanted 6329580
found 6343217
[ 106.581857] parent transid verify failed on 168079851520 wanted 6329580
found 6343217
[ 106.581880] BTRFS warning (d
After reverting to previous kernel 3.11.8 two of three btrfs
filesystems works without problem, but third is failing with error:
[ 181.060135] parent transid verify failed on 529301504 wanted 99194
found 99193
[ 181.076391] parent transid verify failed on 529301504 wanted 99194
found 99193
SEGV.
Now the filesystem does not mount and none of the recovery options I
have tried work.
I have upgraded to Debian testing and are now using kerne3.10-2-amd64
When I try btrfsck I get heaps of these :
Ignoring transid failure
parent transid verify failed on 24419581267968 wanted 301480 found
On Aug 31, 2013, at 4:01 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> ronnie sahlberg posted on Sat, 31 Aug 2013 14:50:36 -0700 as excerpted:
>
>> And while btrfsck eventually does complete the filesystem remains
>> unmountable.
>>
>> Any advice ?
>
> This isn't specific to your question, but i
ronnie sahlberg posted on Sat, 31 Aug 2013 14:50:36 -0700 as excerpted:
> And while btrfsck eventually does complete the filesystem remains
> unmountable.
>
> Any advice ?
This isn't specific to your question, but in general...
In the "Question: How can I recover this partition? (unable to fin
btrfs command segfaulting.
Now when I have rebooted but the filesystem does not mount.
When I run "btrfsck /dev/sde" I get a lot of
parent transid verify failed on 3539986560 wanted 301481 found 301495
parent transid verify failed on 3539986560 wanted 301481 found 301495
pare
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
