On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 09:14:00AM +, Duncan wrote:
> Dmitry Katsubo posted on Sun, 18 Oct 2015 11:44:08 +0200 as excerpted:
>
> >> Meanwhile, the present btrfs raid1 read-scheduler is both pretty simple
> >> to code up and pretty simple to arrange tests for that run either one
> >> side or
Dmitry Katsubo posted on Sun, 18 Oct 2015 11:44:08 +0200 as excerpted:
>> Meanwhile, the present btrfs raid1 read-scheduler is both pretty simple
>> to code up and pretty simple to arrange tests for that run either one
>> side or the other, but not both, or that are well balanced to both.
>>
Dmitry Katsubo posted on Sun, 18 Oct 2015 11:44:08 +0200 as excerpted:
[Regarding the btrfs raid1 "device-with-the-most-space" chunk-allocation
strategy.]
> I think the mentioned strategy (fill in the device with most free space)
> is not most effective. If the data is spread equally, the read
Hugo Mills posted on Mon, 26 Oct 2015 09:24:57 + as excerpted:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 09:14:00AM +, Duncan wrote:
>> Dmitry Katsubo posted on Sun, 18 Oct 2015 11:44:08 +0200 as excerpted:
>>
>>> I think PID-based solution is not the best one. Why not simply take a
>>> random device?
On 16/10/2015 10:18, Duncan wrote:
> Dmitry Katsubo posted on Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:10:13 +0200 as excerpted:
>
>> On 15 October 2015 at 02:48, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> [snipped]
>>
>> Thanks for this information. As far as I can see, btrfs-tools v4.1.2 in
>> now in experimental
Dmitry Katsubo posted on Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:10:13 +0200 as excerpted:
> On 15 October 2015 at 02:48, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> [snipped]
>
> Thanks for this information. As far as I can see, btrfs-tools v4.1.2 in
> now in experimental Debian repo (but you anyway suggest at
On 15 October 2015 at 02:48, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Dmitry Katsubo posted on Wed, 14 Oct 2015 22:27:29 +0200 as excerpted:
>
>> On 14/10/2015 16:40, Anand Jain wrote:
# mount -o degraded /var Oct 11 18:20:15 kernel: BTRFS: too many
missing devices, writeable mount is not
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 04:10:13PM +0200, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
[snip]
> If I may ask:
>
> Provided that btrfs allowed to mount a volume in read-only mode – does
> it mean that add data blocks are present (e.g. it has assured that add
> files / directories can be read)?
>
> Do you have any ideas
Dear btrfs community,
I am facing several problems regarding to btrfs, and I will be very
thankful if someone can help me with. Also while playing with btrfs I
have few suggestions – would be nice if one can comment on those.
While starting the system, /var (which is btrfs volume) failed to be
On 14/10/2015 16:40, Anand Jain wrote:
>> # mount -o degraded /var
>> Oct 11 18:20:15 kernel: BTRFS: too many missing devices, writeable
>> mount is not allowed
>>
>> # mount -o degraded,ro /var
>> # btrfs device add /dev/sdd1 /var
>> ERROR: error adding the device '/dev/sdd1' - Read-only file
Dmitry Katsubo posted on Wed, 14 Oct 2015 22:27:29 +0200 as excerpted:
> On 14/10/2015 16:40, Anand Jain wrote:
>>> # mount -o degraded /var Oct 11 18:20:15 kernel: BTRFS: too many
>>> missing devices, writeable mount is not allowed
>>>
>>> # mount -o degraded,ro /var # btrfs device add /dev/sdd1
11 matches
Mail list logo