> Well off hand it seems like the missing 2.73TB has nothing on it at > all, and doesn't need to be counted as missing. The other missing is > counted, and should have all of its data replicated elsewhere. But > then you're running into csum errors. So something still isn't right, > we just don't understand what it is.
I'm not sure what we can do to get a better understanding of these errors, that said it may not be necessary if replace helps, more below. > Btrfs replace has been around for a while. 'man btrfs replace' the > command takes the form 'btrfs replace start' plus three required > pieces of information. You should be able to infer the missing devid > using 'btrfs show' looks like it's 6. I was looking under btrfs device, sorry about that. I do have the command. I tried replace and it seemed more promising than the last attempt, it wrote enough data to the new drive to overflow and break my overlay. I'm trying it without the overlay on the destination device, I'll report back later with the results. I'm running ubuntu linux-image-4.2.0-34-generic with a patch to remove this check: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/fs/btrfs/super.c#L1770 I can switch to whatever kernel though as desired. Would you prefer a mainline ubuntu packaged kernel? Straight from kernel.org? -JohnF -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
