On 10/26/2011 07:25 PM, Helmut Hullen wrote:
Hallo, dima,
Du meintest am 26.10.11:
I'm trying to rm some files, this is what I get in dmesg:
[30975.249519] [ cut here ]
[30975.249529] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:4588
__btrfs_free_extent+0x3b7/0x7ed()
[...]
This morning, I have a strange behavior when doing a tail -f
on a log file.
cat log runs successfully, but
tail -f log hangs.
Running a strace shows it hanging on lseek(3, 0, SEEK_CUR...
3 being the fd for that log file.
In dmesg:
[59881.520030] INFO: task btrfs-delalloc-:763 blocked for more
Hi
resend without the perf attachment, which could be found here:
http://tuxadero.com/multistorage/perf.report.txt.bz2
Best Regards,
martin
Original-Nachricht
Betreff: Re: ceph on btrfs [was Re: ceph on non-btrfs file systems]
Datum: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 22:38:47 +0200
Von:
Hi Martin,
a quick dig into your perf report show a large amount of swapper work.
If this is the case, i would suspect latency. So do you have not
enough physical ram in your machine ?
Greetings
Stefan Majer
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Martin Mailand mar...@tuxadero.com wrote:
Hi
Hi Stefan,
I think the machine has enough ram.
root@s-brick-003:~# free -m
total used free sharedbuffers cached
Mem: 3924 2401 1522 0 42 2115
-/+ buffers/cache:243 3680
Swap: 1951 0
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 11:18:42AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
and this clobber the original ret value which is returned a few
lines below and used in the caller.
} out: free_extent_state(cached_state);
return ret; }
*smack*
Ugh. You're right. It avoids the corruption but
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 09:23:54AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:22:48PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200,
So, I was trying to downgrade my Ubuntu last night, and, before doing anything
risky like that, I backed up my disk via dd to an image on an external disk.
The critical part here is that I'm afraid I did something truly stupid: I'm
afraid I did the dd... live. (I can't swear to this, and it does
Hi everyone,
I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
yet in the kernel. This also has a few small commits that I had queued
up outside of the fsck work.
Hugo, many thanks for keeping up the integration tree! Taking out the
features not in the kernel meant I had
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:27:07AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
yet in the kernel. This also has a few small commits that I had queued
up outside of the fsck work.
Hugo, many thanks for keeping up the integration tree!
Hallo, Ken,
Du meintest am 27.10.11:
So, I dd'd everything back, and now it crashes on boot. Booting to a
2.6.x kernel (which is what I had on-hand on a USB drive) mounts it,
but doesn't let me *do* anything (though it spews btrfs errors in
dmesg). Getting Ubuntu 11.10 (kernel rev. 3.0.0)
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:07:38AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 09:23:54AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:22:48PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM -0400,
I don't quite understand the behavior of btrfs fi defrag
~# truncate -s2G ~/a
~# mkfs.btrfs ~/a
nodesize 4096 leafsize 4096 sectorsize 4096 size 2.00GB
~# mount -o loop ~/a /mnt/1
/mnt/1# cd x
/mnt/1# df -h .
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/loop1 2.0G 64K
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 01:56:48PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
2011/10/24 Josef Bacik jo...@redhat.com:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
[adding linux-btrfs to cc]
Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
2011/10/27 Josef Bacik jo...@redhat.com:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 01:56:48PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
2011/10/24 Josef Bacik jo...@redhat.com:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
[adding linux-btrfs to cc]
Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
On
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 04:58:54PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:27:07AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
yet in the kernel. This also has a few small commits that I had queued
up outside of the fsck
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 05:32:58PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 04:58:54PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:27:07AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
I've pulled in Hugo's integration tree, minus the features that were not
yet in the kernel. This also has
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Ken D'Ambrosio k...@jots.org wrote:
So, I was trying to downgrade my Ubuntu last night, and, before doing anything
risky like that, I backed up my disk via dd to an image on an external disk.
some of us make use of snapshot/clone, whether it's using btrfs or
some of us make use of snapshot/clone, whether it's using btrfs or zfs :)
No, this is just flat my fault: it doesn't matter what backup method you use if
you do it wrong. (I actually have three snapshots of each of my two
partitions.)
What do you mean don't let you do anything? Can you mount
On 10/28/2011 09:32 AM, Ken D'Ambrosio wrote:
some of us make use of snapshot/clone, whether it's using btrfs or zfs :)
No, this is just flat my fault: it doesn't matter what backup method you use if
you do it wrong. (I actually have three snapshots of each of my two
partitions.)
What do
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 7:32 AM, Ken D'Ambrosio k...@jots.org wrote:
some of us make use of snapshot/clone, whether it's using btrfs or zfs :)
No, this is just flat my fault: it doesn't matter what backup method you use
if
you do it wrong. (I actually have three snapshots of each of my two
I've also got the basis of a set of regression tests for -progs,
which I'll send out patches for in the next couple of days. At the
moment, it only tests building and snapshots, but should be relatively
easily extensible to the other bits of ./btrfs (although I'm not sure
how we can easily
Stephane Chazelas wrote:
I don't quite understand the behavior of btrfs fi defrag
~# truncate -s2G ~/a
~# mkfs.btrfs ~/a
nodesize 4096 leafsize 4096 sectorsize 4096 size 2.00GB
~# mount -o loop ~/a /mnt/1
/mnt/1# cd x
/mnt/1# df -h .
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted
When the FS is mounted with compress:
~# mkfs.btrfs ./a
nodesize 4096 leafsize 4096 sectorsize 4096 size 2.00GB
~# mount -o compress ./a /mnt/1
~# cd /mnt/1
/mnt/1# yes | head -c400M a
/mnt/1# sync
/mnt/1# df -h .
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/loop1
24 matches
Mail list logo
