Misono Tomohiro - 27.11.18, 06:24:
> Importantly, in order to make output consistent for both root and
> non-privileged user, this changes the behavior of "subvolume list":
> - (default) Only list in subvolume under the specified path.
>Path needs to be a subvolume.
Does that work
Am Samstag, 11. Mai 2013, 12:27:09 schrieb Tim Eggleston:
Hi list,
I have a few large image files (VMware workstation VMDKs and TrueCrypt
containers) which I routinely back up over the network to a btrfs raid10
volume via bigsync (https://code.google.com/p/bigsync/).
The VM images in
Am Samstag, 11. Mai 2013, 17:57:11 schrieb Tim Eggleston:
Yes. The command just triggers the defragmentation which takes place
in the
background. Try a sync afterwards :)
Sorry Martin, I should have specified that I wondered if it was like
the scrub operation in that respect, so I left
Am Donnerstag, 9. Mai 2013, 07:13:56 schrieb Zhi Yong Wu:
HI, all
Hi!
I saw that bcache will be merged into kernel upstream soon, so i
want to know if btrfs hot relocation support is still meanful, if no,
i will not continue to work on it. can anyone let me know this?
thanks.
I really
Am Sonntag, 19. Mai 2013, 21:43:14 schrieb Zhi Yong Wu:
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 9. Mai 2013, 07:13:56 schrieb Zhi Yong Wu:
[…]
ZFS and BTRFS have shown that RAID support within the filesystem can make
a lot of sense. I
Am Dienstag, 21. Mai 2013, 13:19:31 schrieb Martin:
Yep, ReiserFS has stood the test of time very well and I'm still using
and abusing it still on various servers all the way from something like
a decade ago!
Very interesting. I only used it for a short time and it worked.
But co-workers lost
Am Donnerstag, 23. Mai 2013, 18:41:11 schrieb George Mitchell:
On 05/23/2013 09:08 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
3) As to my knowledge mount times of large partitions can be quite
long with ReiserFS 3.
That may well be, but I certainly wouldn't consider btrfs mount times
fast
Am Freitag, 24. Mai 2013, 06:13:04 schrieb Duncan:
2) Due to snapshots I know have well snapshots for my backup. And even
on SSD for my /home. I am not yet creating those in an automated way,
but well I do use them.
As I already mentioned the warning on the wiki, do be aware of the
Am Samstag, 25. Mai 2013, 03:58:12 schrieb Duncan:
Leonidas Spyropoulos posted on Fri, 24 May 2013 23:38:17 +0100 as
excerpted:
On 24 May 2013 21:07, cwillu cwi...@cwillu.com wrote:
No need to specify ssd, it's automatically detected.
I'm not so sure it did detected. When I manually
Hi!
Now I got it myself what I read again and again on this mailinglist: During
apt-get upgrade I get no space left on device.
But there is:
merkaba:~ df -hT /
DateisystemTyp Größe Benutzt Verf. Verw% Eingehängt auf
/dev/mapper/merkaba-debian btrfs 19G 14G 4,6G 76% /
Am Samstag, 25. Mai 2013, 19:36:03 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Hi!
Now I got it myself what I read again and again on this mailinglist: During
apt-get upgrade I get no space left on device.
But there is:
merkaba:~ df -hT /
DateisystemTyp Größe Benutzt Verf. Verw
Am Samstag, 25. Mai 2013, 14:13:07 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
The SSD is in use for about 2 years. I left about 25 GiB free of the 300 GB
it
has.
merkaba:~ smartctl -a /dev/sda | grep Host
225 Host_Writes_32MiB 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age Always
- 261260
Am Samstag, 25. Mai 2013, 23:29:41 schrieb Leonidas Spyropoulos:
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
wrote:
Am Samstag, 25. Mai 2013, 03:58:12 schrieb Duncan:
[...]
And can be verified by:
martin@merkaba:~ grep ssd /proc/mounts
/dev/mapper/merkaba
Am Dienstag, 6. August 2013, 16:05:50 schrieb Eric Sandeen:
On 8/6/13 3:45 PM, Filipe David Manana wrote:
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Eric Sandeen sand...@redhat.com wrote:
On 8/6/13 1:27 PM, Filipe David Borba Manana wrote:
This change allows for most mount options to be persisted in
Am Freitag, 23. August 2013, 12:29:42 schrieb Xavier Bassery:
On Fri, 23 Aug 2013 11:38:56 +0200
David Kofler dkofle...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
can someone tell me which mount options are included in defaults
mount option? Couldn't find this in BTRFS Wiki. I'm using Debian
Wheezy 7.1
Am Freitag, 20. September 2013, 22:34:15 schrieb Josef Bacik:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 12:25:02AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Hi!
I tried to create a snapshot today like this:
merkaba:/mnt/debian-zeit ls -l
insgesamt 0
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 210 Sep 20 11:48 root
merkaba
Am Samstag, 21. September 2013, 10:54:55 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Am Freitag, 20. September 2013, 22:34:15 schrieb Josef Bacik:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 12:25:02AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Hi!
I tried to create a snapshot today like this:
merkaba:/mnt/debian-zeit ls
CCs restored. Its usual to keep CCs on Linux kernel related mailing lists.
Am Sunday 23 January 2011 schrieb Helmut Hullen:
Hallo, Martin,
Du meintest am 23.01.11:
I have something I do not have the slightest clue on how to track
down:
Occasionally with 2.6.37 plain vanilla my
with 2.6.37 on a BTRFS test machine
Submitter : Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
Date : 2011-01-23 12:06 (11 days old)
Message-ID: 201101231306.23069.mar...@lichtvoll.de
References: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernelm=129578445613283w=2
Well I now tested with 2.6.36
Hi!
[ANNOUNCE] Btrfs v0.9
[...]
* Stripe size parameter to mkfs.btrfs (-s size_in_bytes). Extents will
be aligned to the stripe size for performance.
[...]
http://fixunix.com/kernel/258991-[announce]-btrfs-v0-9-a.html
versus
-s, --sectorsize size
Specify the
Hi!
In mailing list debian-user-german we are discussing safe ways to do a
fsck when mounted.
I tested with Ext4 that fsck -nf works either with mount -o remount,ro or
fsfreeze -f while writing with:
I=0; while true ; let I=I+1 ; do touch /boot/test$I ; sleep 0.2 ; done
In the read only
Hi!
I scanned for relevant topics in the last two years but except for putting
a swap file on compress=lzo this march I didn´t found anything.
Does compression make sense on SSD? Or more specifically:
1) In what chunk sizes does BTRFS compress? How much data is affected when
a byte is changed
Hi!
Short summary: I suspect that rsync´ing files to a newly created BTRFS
partition with a subvolume *and* enabled space_cache triggers the error
mentioned in the subject line of this mail. I reported this also as:
Bug 38112 - btrfs: failed to load free space cache for block group on
Am Dienstag, 11. Februar 2014, 15:50:12 schrieb Dave:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Today I started getting those on 3.14-rc. One core as displayed as 100%
system CPU. I rebooted cause the system didn´t respond consistently to
user input
Am Montag, 17. Februar 2014, 08:06:50 schrieb Chris Mason:
On 02/17/2014 05:35 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Dienstag, 11. Februar 2014, 15:50:12 schrieb Dave:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Today I started getting those on 3.14-rc
Am Sonntag, 9. März 2014, 11:33:50 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Sun, Mar 09, 2014 at 11:23:29AM +0100, Swâmi Petaramesh wrote:
Le dimanche 9 mars 2014 11:01:17 vous avez écrit :
This ThinkPad T520 has been with BTRFS since installation of the Debian
sid system on it with Kernel 2.6.39 or even
Hi!
Since a few days this ThinkPad T520 has 780 GB SSD capacity. The 300 GB of
the Intel SSD 320 were almost full and that 480 GB Crucial m500 mSATA SSD
was cheap enough to just buy it.
I created a new logical volume for big and not that often changed files that
is just on the msata and moved
Hi!
On 3.14.0-rc4-tp520 (compiled with gcc 4.8.2) shrinking my /home from about
260 GiB to 150 GiB resulted in a BTRFS hang.
First it relocated block groups, but then on one the btrfs command was
blocked for more than 120 seconds.
A second attempt after a reboot quickly had the same result.
I
Am Sonntag, 23. März 2014, 15:51:34 schrieben Sie:
I was expecting either a speed improvement after rebalance, or no
noticeable effect, but I am extremely disappointed to see that now (and
after having rebooted), my system has become slow like hell, takes at least
10x longer to boot and
Hi,
[not cc´ing you as you didn´t cc anyone and I think you do not like to be CC
´d, note that usual on kernel related mailing lists this is a convention, so I
may miss it at some time. not restoring other cc´s as I am lazy right now]
Am Samstag, 5. April 2014, 15:06:26 schrieb Duncan:
Garry
Am Donnerstag, 10. April 2014, 17:51:26 schrieb Michael Schuerig:
On Thursday 10 April 2014 15:15:02 Duncan wrote:
Meanwhile (2), given the existence of those tested backups, there's
yet another way to accomplish things. Simply restore from the
backups the same way you would if the
Hi Liu,
Am Donnerstag, 10. April 2014, 23:55:21 schrieb Liu Bo:
Hi,
Just FYI, these patches are also available on the following site,
kernel:
https://github.com/liubogithub/btrfs-work.git dedup-on-3.14-linux
progs:
https://github.com/liubogithub/btrfs-progs.git dedup
I bet its good
Am Freitag, 25. April 2014, 11:40:28 schrieben Sie:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
wrote:
Hello,
I have:
merkaba:/mnt#1 btrfs scrub status -d /home
scrub status for […]
scrub device /dev/dm-0 (id 1) status
scrub started
[keeping dropped CC although not customary on this list]
Am Mittwoch, 30. April 2014, 00:42:44 schrieb Duncan:
Holger Hoffstätte posted on Tue, 29 Apr 2014 17:33:09 + as excerpted:
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 05:10:31PM +, Duncan wrote:
David Sterba posted on Tue, 29 Apr 2014 17:56:47
Hi!
I am getting BTRFS hangs unregularily on SSD based BTRFS RAID 1.
Any hints?
If you need additional data please tell.
Raid is
merkaba:~ lsblk /dev/sda4 /dev/sdb3
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda48:40 279G 0 part
├─sata-home (dm-4)
Am Donnerstag, 5. Juni 2014, 15:30:26 schrieb Swâmi Petaramesh:
Hi,
I just received a new laptop with a Micron 256GB SSD, and I plan to install
Fedora 20 onto it.
I'm considering either BTRFS or ext4 (over LUKS-encrypted LVM) for this
machine, but I'm afraid BTRFS might generate too
Am Samstag, 14. Juni 2014, 02:53:20 schrieb Duncan:
I am reaching the conclusion that fallocate is not the problem. The
fallocate increase the filesize of about 8MB, which is enough for some
logging. So it is not called very often.
But...
If a file isn't (properly[1]) set NOCOW (and
Am Samstag, 14. Juni 2014, 12:59:31 schrieb Kai Krakow:
Well, how did I accomblish that?
Setting no cow and defragmenting regularily?
Quite a complex setup for a casual Linux user.
Any solution should be automatic. I´d suggest by a combination of sane
application behaviour and measures within
Am Donnerstag, 23. Juni 2011 schrieb Josef Bacik:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 07:37:12PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Hi!
Short summary: I suspect that rsync´ing files to a newly created
BTRFS partition with a subvolume *and* enabled space_cache triggers
the error mentioned
Am Samstag, 2. Juli 2011 schrieben Sie:
On Sat, 2011-07-02 at 19:08 +0100, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:
Hello,
I just installed an archlinux with btrfs root partition and would
like to set the correct mount properties
Following this:
Am Montag, 4. Juli 2011 schrieb Leonidas Spyropoulos:
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
wrote:
Am Samstag, 2. Juli 2011 schrieben Sie:
On Sat, 2011-07-02 at 19:08 +0100, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:
Hello,
I just installed an archlinux with btrfs
Am Donnerstag, 25. August 2011 schrieb Anand Jain:
anyways, solutions containing disk-write-cache disabled and SSD
is quite popular now a days. And in terms of random synchronous
write performance they are awesome.
There are SSD with capacitors such as Intel SSD 320. These according to
Am Donnerstag, 1. September 2011 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 03:24:28PM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 09/01/2011 03:20 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
You may have missed the on vacation bit.
I did read the on vacation bit. Not that it is any of my business,
but how
Hi!
Has a developer fixed this issue in the meanwhile? I did it just again
today.
I overlooked Dolphin´s device is busy message and unplugged it again. I
had to reboot, a mount attempt failed, I had to reboot another time, after
btrfs-zero-log it worked. I have traces available but I think
Cc to BTRFS mailinglist as it triggered the idea of mine again.
Hi!
Today I did it again and removed a BTRFS partition that is written too.
That BTRFS as of Kernel 3.0.3 (debian package) does not like very much. I
think thats a known issue and I wrote a mail to BTRFS mailing list about
it.
Am Sonntag, 11. September 2011 schrieb Hin-Tak Leung:
--- On Sun, 11/9/11, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Cc to BTRFS mailinglist as it
triggered the idea of mine again.
Hi!
Today I did it again and removed a BTRFS partition that is
written too.
That BTRFS
Am Sonntag, 11. September 2011 schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven:
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 18:53, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
wrote:
Frankly, I never tried this on AmigaOS. I know that AmigaOS expects
the exact same floppy disk to be inserted again. Only the same name
isn´t enough
Am Freitag, 7. Oktober 2011 schrieb Gour-Gadadhara Dasa:
On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 08:39:36 -0700
Mike i...@snappymail.ca wrote:
I also don't think you are giving people enough credit. e2fsck will
cause corruption pretty much everytime its run on a mounted file
system, but a nice big nasty
Hello,
Am Freitag, 6. August 2010 schrieb Chris Mason:
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 02:30:39PM +0300, Sami Liedes wrote:
On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 12:22:14AM +0200, Oystein Viggen wrote:
IIRC, the limit on hard links is per directory. That is, if you
put each hard link into its own directory,
Am Mittwoch, 12. Oktober 2011 schrieb Jeff Putney:
I do not argue that having a nice fsck sooner than later is fine, but
I question the usefulness of repeating reminders. Chris Mason and
other developers possibly working on the fsck should know by now,
that you want it. So its unlikely
Hi Helmut,
Am Montag, 10. Oktober 2011 schrieb Helmut Hullen:
The thing is that marking sectors bad is a
(pretty poor) band-aid for a much bigger problem: If you're hitting
persistent read errors and re-writing the blocks doesn't fix it, your
disk is already close to being completely
Hi Josef,
Am Montag, 8. August 2011 schrieb Josef Bacik:
On 08/06/2011 10:16 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
I've always gotten space cache generation warnings, but some time
after 3.0 they started going nuts. I get:
space cache generation (14667727114112179905) does not match inode
Am Montag, 7. November 2011 schrieb dima:
Hello,
Hi Dima,
Is there any possibility to remount a compressed btrfs without any
compression at all?
Syslinux bootloader does not understand any btrfs compression and
whenever I edit syslinux.cfg on my compressed / subvolume, the file
becomes
Hi Maciej,
Am Freitag, 26. August 2011 schrieb Maciej Marcin Piechotka:
On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 19:55 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
That said I also do not have any issues with BTRFS on a ThinkPad T23
for /
and /home. But then the machine has an hibernate-to-disk-and-resume
uptime
Hi!
On apt-get dist-upgrading my Amarok ThinkPad T23 with BTRFS as /
and as /home I get extremely slow operation - my ThinkPad T42 with Ext4
is running circles around it and thats likely not only due to the faster CPU.
vmstat 1 shows:
procs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io
Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Its not critical for me to fix these issues (soon), but I am curious
whether its possible to get the filesystem speedier by some
maintenance.
Maybe after it is clear why it is so slow in the first place ;).
--
Martin 'Helios
Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
On Friday, 16 December, 2011 18:54:46 you wrote:
Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Its not critical for me to fix these issues (soon), but I am
curious whether its possible to get the filesystem speedier
Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
I wonder whether it might be a good idea to have nodatacow for /:
Nope. Doesn´t seem to help much.
How to turn it off, after turning it on?
deepdance:~ LANG=C mount -o remount,datacow /
mount: / not mounted already, or bad option
Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Sergei Trofimovich:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 21:58:45 +0100
Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Nope. Doesn´t seem to help much.
How to turn it off, after turning it on?
deepdance:~ LANG=C mount -o remount,datacow /
mount: / not mounted
Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:09:56PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
I think I will scrub / balance / defragment the filesystem after a
backup. But I am not sure in what order.
I understand that defragment defragments files. But then what
Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieben Sie:
On Friday, 16 December, 2011 20:53:58 Martin Steigerwald wrote:
I found a solution, but requires a bit of setup.
The idea is to avoid do perform sync during the package
installation. In order to avoid data loss in case of failure
Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Chris Samuel:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 04:51:51 AM Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Currently I have:
deepdance:~ cat /proc/version
Linux version 3.0.0-2-686-pae (Debian 3.0.0-6)
You are using a fairly old kernel btrfs-wise, I believe there's been
work done
Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
If BTRFS has other means to guarantee filesystem consistency that is
faster it might still make fsync() a no-op or just creating a
snapshot temporarily automatically.
To clear this up: It should only make it a no-op if it guarentees
Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb David McBride:
On Sat, 2011-12-17 at 13:00 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
BTW on my ThinkPad T520 I do not perceive performance issues for
BTRFS as /. But then thats located on an Intel SSD 320 where seeks
should not matter much.
Okay, that would
Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Hugo Mills:
I might still be doing the balance for that optical viewing pleasure
;).
:)
It can't hurt, and with such a small FS it probably won't take
long.
Now I first did a defrag and then a balance. The balance was heavier I had
music
Hi!
Finally I tried scrubbing the / BTRFS filesystem mentioned in the thread
speeding up slow btrfs filesystem. However the machine looks up hard
then. It repeats the last few seconds of audio all over again, no mouse
and no ssh connection anymore:
deepdance:~ btrfs scrub start /
scrub
Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2011 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Hi!
Finally I tried scrubbing the / BTRFS filesystem mentioned in the
thread speeding up slow btrfs filesystem. However the machine looks
up hard then. It repeats the last few seconds of audio all over again,
no mouse and no ssh
Martin Steigerwald:
Hi!
Finally I tried scrubbing the / BTRFS filesystem mentioned in the
thread speeding up slow btrfs filesystem. However the machine looks
up hard then. It repeats the last few seconds of audio all over again,
no mouse and no ssh connection anymore:
deepdance:~ btrfs scrub
Am Samstag 06 Februar 2010 schrieben Sie:
On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Daniel J Blueman
daniel.blue...@gmail.com wrote:
These proc entries affect just array reconstruction, not general I/O
performance/throughput, so affect just an edge-case of applications
requiring maximum
logical volumes and get
mango:~# df -hT /mnt/zeit
Dateisystem TypGröße Benut Verf Ben% Eingehängt auf
/dev/mapper/mango1-homelokal1
btrfs400G 101M 400G 1% /mnt/zeit
Shouldn't that be 200GiB for a BTRFS Raid 1 setup?
Ciao,
--
Martin Steigerwald - team(ix) GmbH - http
Am Mittwoch 17 Februar 2010 schrieben Sie:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Martin Steigerwald m...@teamix.de
wrote:
Leaving Cc to backports-users mailinglist and Debian package maintainer
dropped as its a technical BTRFS discussion.
Hi!
[...]
It basically works, but I am wondering
Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2012 schrieb Bernd Kohler:
Hi,
Hi Bernd,
this is not really a bug in btrfs but to spread the info I will just
drop this short message:
My System (VirtualBox VM, 3 virtual HDDs with 10G, 5G and 3G) is today
installed Ubuntu 12.04 LTS 64bit with Kernel 3.2.0-26 generic,
Am Montag, 26. März 2012 schrieb Skylar Burtenshaw:
Fajar A. Nugraha list at fajar.net writes:
Didn't Chris' last response basically say use kernel 3.2 or newer,
mount the fs (possibly with -o ro), and copy the data elsewhere?
Why yes, yes it did actually. I appreciate your spotlighting
Am Freitag, 13. Juli 2012 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 02:23:53PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Montag, 26. März 2012 schrieb Skylar Burtenshaw:
Fajar A. Nugraha list at fajar.net writes:
Didn't Chris' last response basically say use kernel 3.2 or
newer, mount
Am Samstag, 14. Juli 2012 schrieb Skylar Burtenshaw:
Martin Steigerwald Martin at lichtvoll.de writes:
Since I didn´t found any explicit mention on it:
Did you try btrfs-zero-log on the partition prior to mounting it?
I had tried that previously, yes. Approximately the date of my first
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 schrieb haveanice...@cv-sv.de:
PS: I would bet that my kind of usage is a very good stress test for
btrfs.
- large file system /backup btrfs with compress enabled.
Content of the file system:
- ./server1 /server5 as directories
- for each server the
Am Donnerstag, 12. Juli 2012 schrieb Bernd Kohler:
Hi @ all,
Hi!
in the last edition of the german Linux-Magazin, there has been an
article about Linux filesystem performance test - the article is titled
Formel Storage - Linux-Dateisystem im Leistungstest.
The author of this article, Mr
Am Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 08:07:02AM -0800, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 01:39:24PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
To Milan Broz: Well now I noticed that you linked to your own blog
entry.
He did not, I'm the one who did
Am Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:49:36PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
I am still not convinced that dm-crypt is the best way to go about
encryption especially for SSDs. But its more of a gut feeling than
anything that I can explain easily
Hi!
Am Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2012 schrieb Bernhard Redl:
On 07/19/2012 03:42 AM, Shavi N wrote:
Hi,
I have btrfs volume, shared via samba. I have a directory of
documents that I want to backup on my server. win7 reports a
maximum of ~3.10MB/s transfer transferring the same directory on
Am Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2012 schrieb Shavi N:
Hi,
Hi Shavi,
Thanks.
This is the output:
btrfs:
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/shared/misc/temp_file bs=1M count=1400
1400+0 records in
1400+0 records out
1468006400 bytes (1.5 GB) copied, 1.56841 s, 936 MB/s
ext4:
$ dd if=/dev/zero
Am Freitag, 20. Juli 2012 schrieb Shavi N:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2012 schrieb Shavi N:
Hi,
Hi Shavi,
Thanks.
This is the output:
btrfs:
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/shared/misc/temp_file bs
Am Freitag, 20. Juli 2012 schrieb Remco Hosman:
11 really fast 15000rpm FC / SAS disks could possibly do 936 MB/s.
But regular 7200rpm SATA disks depending to the on disk location
might be as slow as 40-50 MB/s – just try fio disk-zone-profile on
one if you do not believe this – and then
Hi Marc,
Am Sonntag, 22. Juli 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I'm still getting a bit more data before updating the btrfs wiki with
my best recommendations for today.
First, everything I've read so far says that the ssd btrfs mount option
makes btrfs slower in benchmarks.
What gives?
Anyone
Am Sonntag, 22. Juli 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
Hi Marc,
Am Sonntag, 22. Juli 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I'm still getting a bit more data before updating the btrfs wiki with
my best recommendations for today.
First, everything I've read so far says that the ssd btrfs mount
Am Montag, 23. Juli 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I just realized that the older thread got a bit confusing, so I'll keep
problems separate and make things simpler :)
On an _unencrypted_ partition on the SSD, running du -sh on a directory
with 15K files, takes 23 seconds on unencrypted SSD and 4
Am Sonntag, 24. Januar 2010 schrieb Michael Niederle:
I'm using btrfs with a kernel 2.6.32.2 (builtin) as the root file
system of a Gentoo Linux installation.
Upgrade your kernel!
This kernel is wy to old for any production use of
BTRFS. Heck, upstream still did not
Hi Marc,
Am Mittwoch, 1. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:08:46PM +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
It it were a random crappy SSD from a random vendor, I'd blame the
SSD, but I have a hard time believing that samsung is selling SSDs
that are slower than hard
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:57:39PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Its getting quite strange.
I would agree :)
Before I paste a bunch of thing, I wanted to thank you for not giving up on
me
and offering your time to help me figure
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
So, doctor, is it bad? :)
randomwrite: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=2K-16K/2K-16K, ioengine=libaio,
iodepth=64
sequentialwrite: (g=1): rw=write, bs=2K-16K/2K-16K, ioengine=libaio,
iodepth=64
randomread: (g=2): rw=randread, bs=2K-16K/2K-16K,
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 01:18:07PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
I've the the fio tests in:
/dev/mapper/cryptroot /var btrfs
rw,noatime,compress=lzo,nossd,discard,space_cache 0 0
… you are still using dm_crypt?
[…]
I just took
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 10:20:07PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Hey, whats this? With Ext4 you have really good random read performance
now! Way better than the Intel SSD 320 and…
Yep, my du -sh tests do show that ext4 is 2x faster
Am Donnerstag, 2. August 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I'll try plugging this SSD in a totally different PC and see what
happens. This may say if it's an AHCI/intel sata driver problem.
Seems we will continue until someone starts to complain here. Maybe
another list will be more
Am Freitag, 3. August 2012 schrieb Mark Marshall:
Hi,
Hi Mark,
I am new to btrfs, and just installed a new system with SLED 11 SP2 a
few days ago.
Now you have a nice SLED 11 SP 2 with official BTRFS support from SUSE.
Did you consider to ask SUSE support? ;)
However the system seems to
Am Sonntag, 5. August 2012 schrieb Florian Lindner:
Hello,
Hi Florian,
I was playing with btrfs and accidentally formatted the disk directly
(/dev/sdb instead of sdb1). Since then I rewrote the GPT partition
table, recreated the partition and ran btrfs device scan. Still, btrfs
filesystem
Am Donnerstag, 30. August 2012 schrieb Josef Bacik:
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 09:18:07AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
I've been trying out different leafsize/nodesize settings by
benchmarking some typical operations.
These changes had more impact than I expected. Using a
leafsize/nodesize
Am Samstag, 8. September 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I read the discussions on hardlinks, and saw that there was a proposed
patch (although I'm not sure if it's due in 3.6 or not, or whether I
can apply it to my 3.5.3 tree).
I was migrating a backup disk to a new btrfs disk, and the backup had
Am Montag, 10. September 2012 schrieb Fajar A. Nugraha:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Martin Steigerwald
mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Am Samstag, 8. September 2012 schrieb Marc MERLIN:
I was migrating a backup disk to a new btrfs disk, and the backup
had a lot of hardlinks to collapse
Am Dienstag, 11. September 2012 schrieb Jan Engelhardt:
On Tuesday 2012-09-11 01:09, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
What about:
- copy first backup version
- btrfs subvol create first next
- copy next backup version
- btrfs subvol create previous next
Wouldn't btrfs subvolume
Am Dienstag, 18. September 2012 schrieb Miao Xie:
static const char * const cmd_subvol_list_usage[] = {
- btrfs subvolume list [-pu] [-s 0|1] path,
+ btrfs subvolume list [-pur] [-s 0|1] path,
List subvolumes (and snapshots),
,
-p print parent
1 - 100 of 489 matches
Mail list logo
