On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Pierre-Matthieu anglade posted on Fri, 29 Apr 2016 11:24:12 + as
> excerpted:
> So while btrfs in general, being still not yet fully stable, isn't yet
> really recommended unless you're using data you can afford to lose,
Pierre-Matthieu anglade posted on Fri, 29 Apr 2016 11:24:12 + as
excerpted:
> Setting up and then testing a system I've stumbled upon something that
> looks exactly similar to the behaviour depicted by Marcin Solecki here
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg53119.html.
>
> Maybe
Hello all,
Setting up and then testing a system I've stumbled upon something that
looks exactly similar to the behaviour depicted by Marcin Solecki here
https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg53119.html.
Maybe unlike Martin I still have all my disk working nicely. So the
Raid array is OK,
Hello all,
I give up for this problem at restore my data
# uname -a
Linux jarvis.home 4.5.0-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
# btrfs --version
btrfs-progs v3.19.1
# btrfs fi show
warning, device 4 is missing
bytenr mismatch, want=21020672, have=21217280
Couldn't read chunk root
Label: none uuid:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
>>The main thing you haven't tried here is mount -o degraded, which
>> is the thing to do if you have a missing device in your array.
>>
>>
Hugo Mills posted on Fri, 18 Mar 2016 18:02:07 + as excerpted:
> Also, that kernel's not really all that good for a parity RAID
> array -- it's the very first one that had the scrub and replace
> implementation, so it's rather less stable with parity RAID than the
> later 4.x kernels. That's
W dniu 2016-03-19 o 00:40, Chris Murphy pisze:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
The main thing you haven't tried here is mount -o degraded, which
is the thing to do if
I try mount with -o degraded but this same effect what recovery:
[ 7133.926778] BTRFS info (device sdc): allowing degraded mounts
[ 7133.926783] BTRFS info (device sdc): disk space caching is enabled
[ 7133.932140] BTRFS info (device sdc): bdev (null) errs: wr 921, rd
164889, flush 0, corrupt
The main thing you haven't tried here is mount -o degraded, which
is the thing to do if you have a missing device in your array.
Also, that kernel's not really all that good for a parity RAID
array -- it's the very first one that had the scrub and replace
implementation, so it's rather less
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
>The main thing you haven't tried here is mount -o degraded, which
> is the thing to do if you have a missing device in your array.
>
>Also, that kernel's not really all that good for a parity RAID
> array -- it's the
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 05:31:51PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
> >The main thing you haven't tried here is mount -o degraded, which
> > is the thing to do if you have a missing device in your array.
> >
> >Also, that
11 matches
Mail list logo