On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 12:35:35PM -0500, Wayne Pollock wrote:
I looked though the wiki (and searched the archives) but
don't see an answer. Will btrfs support old POSIX-style ACLs
and permissions, or the new NFS/NT style ACLs like ZFS? From
the patch I saw, it seems old POSIX ACLs and
There is room in btrfs for a fourth time called otime, but it is not
currently used or even initialized. Once there are APIs, it should be
possible to add crtime support with a slight format upgrade.
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 02:55:12AM +0100, Hubert Kario wrote:
From what I could find, btrfs
A filesystem can have disk extents in arbitrary places on the disk, as
well as extents that must be read into memory because they have
compression or encryption btrfs doesn't support. These extents can be
passed to the new extent iteration functions, which will handle all the
details of alignment,
Filesystems need to provide a function open_blah that fills a struct
convert_fs with some information and three function pointers.
The function pointers are:
- cache_free_extents, which takes a struct extent_io_tree and marks all
extents not being used by the filesystem as DIRTY
- copy_inodes,
struct {
diff --git a/convert/convert.h b/convert/convert.h
new file mode 100644
index 000..4f31775
--- /dev/null
+++ b/convert/convert.h
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+/*
+ * Copyright (C) 2007 Oracle. All rights reserved.
+ * Copyright (C) 2010 Sean Bartell. All rights reserved.
+ *
+ * This program
Whoops, there's a major memory leak. Please apply this patch to the
patch :).
diff --git a/convert.c b/convert.c
index dfd2976..7bb4ed0 100644
--- a/convert.c
+++ b/convert.c
@@ -471,21 +471,24 @@ int finish_file_extents(struct extent_iterate_data *priv)
return
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 11:55:38PM +0800, Wengang Wang wrote:
I guess the reason is that the 300M file btrfs and the one on your
partition have different block size. Thus 65k zeros on your file image
doesn't mean 65k on the partition. So maybe you will try with blocks
instead of bytes.
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 06:13:41PM +, Alli Quaknaa wrote:
So here are first ~12M of the partition. There was some junk preceding
what is in the file, but it mostly looked like my swap or something
(cached css, javascript and webpages I've recently visited - though I
hope the beginning of
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:25:34PM +, Alli Quaknaa wrote:
I think I have found the real superblock you are talking about, but
I'm afraid I may have written something in the first 64MiB. Is there a
chance btrfsck will recover it?
btrfsck is currently very limited; it only detects a limited
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 09:40:28PM +0800, Yan, Zheng wrote:
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Sean Bartell
wingedtachik...@gmail.com wrote:
An extent_io_tree is used for all free space information. This allows
removal of ext2_alloc_block and ext2_free_block, and makes
create_ext2_image
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 07:29:56PM -0700, u...@sonic.net wrote:
Is there a more aggressive filesystem restorer than btrfsck? It simply
gives up immediately with the following error:
btrfsck: disk-io.c:739: open_ctree_fd: Assertion `!(!tree_root-node)'
failed.
btrfsck currently only checks
On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 10:57:44AM +0200, Stephen wrote:
Im just wondering if subvolumes or snap shot can have quotas imposed on
them.
Subvolume quotas are one of the many features that haven't yet been
implemented. See
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Development_timeline.
--
To
dan.kozlow...@gmail.com wrote:
Sean Bartell wingedtachikoma at gmail.com writes:
Is there a more aggressive filesystem restorer than btrfsck? It simply
gives up immediately with the following error:
btrfsck: disk-io.c:739: open_ctree_fd: Assertion `!(!tree_root-node)'
failed.
btrfsck
Makes btrfs_ioctl_setflags return -ENOSPC and other errors when
necessary.
Signed-off-by: Sean Bartell wingedtachik...@gmail.com
---
I ran chattr -R on a full FS and btrfs crashed. This overlaps with the patch
series being worked on by Jeff Mahoney.
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 17 -
1
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:27:39PM +0200, Mathijs Kwik wrote:
Hi all,
I'm used to snapshots with LVM and I would like to compare them to btrfs.
The case I want to compare is the following:
At the moment a snapshot is created, no extra space is needed (maybe
some metadata overhead) and all
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:29:07AM +0200, Mathijs Kwik wrote:
Hi all,
I read that btrfs - in a raid mode - does not mimic the behavior of
traditional (hw/sw) raid.
After writing to a btrfs raid filesystem, data will only be
distributed the way you expect after running a rebalance.
This is
In response to your original questions, btrfs currently gives no control
over the allocation of data or metadata. I'm sure someone will implement
more control eventually.
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:49:33PM +0800, wks1986 wrote:
Another issue is the speed of fsck. There will always be times when
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:30:14AM -0400, Yuehai Xu wrote:
I know BTRFS is a kind of Log-structured File System, which doesn't do
overwrite. Here is my question, suppose file A is overwritten by A',
instead of writing A' to the original place of A, a new place is
selected to store it. However,
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 02:45:29PM -0400, Yuehai Xu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Sean Bartell wingedtachik...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:30:14AM -0400, Yuehai Xu wrote:
I know BTRFS is a kind of Log-structured File System, which doesn't do
overwrite. Here is my
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 03:39:07PM -0400, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Sean Bartell wingedtachik...@gmail.com
wrote:
In btrfs, this is solved by doing the same thing for the inode--a new
place for the leaf holding the inode is chosen. Then the parent of the
leaf
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:43:56PM -0500, Nathan Caza wrote:
Is this up-to-date? if not, has anyone put together something like
this more recent??
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/User:Wtachi/On-disk_Format
It should be up-to-date, to the extent that it contains any useful
information
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 03:47:58AM -0500, Nathan Caza wrote:
I think I'm on the verge of getting all my data back; the only missing
piece is to recalculate the crc checksum of my altered superblock and
I'm having trouble finding the correct function/method; the data I am
checksumming is (based
(sorry for sending twice)
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 02:23:13PM +, João Eduardo Luís wrote:
Basically, I need to be aware how the COW works in BTRFS, and what it may
allow one to achieve. Questions follow.
From your questions, you don't seem to understand CoW. CoW is basically
an
23 matches
Mail list logo
