On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Marc MERLIN <m...@merlins.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 06:00:55AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote: >> So, I ran this: >> gargamel:/mnt/btrfs_pool2# btrfs balance start -dusage=60 -v . & >> [1] 24450 >> Dumping filters: flags 0x1, state 0x0, force is off >> DATA (flags 0x2): balancing, usage=60 >> gargamel:/mnt/btrfs_pool2# while :; do btrfs balance status .; sleep 60; done >> 0 out of about 0 chunks balanced (0 considered), -nan% left
This (0/0/0, -nan%) seems alarming. I had this output once when the system spontaneously rebooted during a balance. I didn't have any bad effects afterward. >> Balance on '.' is running >> 0 out of about 73 chunks balanced (2 considered), 100% left >> Balance on '.' is running >> >> After about 20mn, it changed to this: >> 1 out of about 73 chunks balanced (6724 considered), 99% left This seems alarming. I wouldn't think # considered should ever exceed # chunks. Although, it does say "about", so maybe it can a little bit, but I wouldn't expect it to exceed it by this much. >> Balance on '.' is running >> >> Now, 12H later, it's still there, only 1 out of 73. >> >> gargamel:/mnt/btrfs_pool2# btrfs fi show . >> Label: 'dshelf2' uuid: 0f1a0c9f-4e54-4fa7-8736-fd50818ff73d >> Total devices 1 FS bytes used 12.72TiB >> devid 1 size 14.55TiB used 13.81TiB path /dev/mapper/dshelf2 >> >> gargamel:/mnt/btrfs_pool2# btrfs fi df . >> Data, single: total=13.57TiB, used=12.60TiB >> System, DUP: total=32.00MiB, used=1.55MiB >> Metadata, DUP: total=121.50GiB, used=116.53GiB >> GlobalReserve, single: total=512.00MiB, used=848.00KiB >> >> kernel: 4.16.8 >> >> Is that expected? Should I be ready to wait days possibly for this >> balance to finish? > > It's now beeen 2 days, and it's still stuck at 1% > 1 out of about 73 chunks balanced (6724 considered), 99% left First, my disclaimer. I'm not a btrfs developer, and although I've ran balance many times, I haven't really studied its output beyond the % left. I don't know why it says "about", and I don't know if it should ever be that far off. In your situation, I would run "btrfs pause <path>", wait to hear from a btrfs developer, and not use the volume whatsoever in the meantime. I can make some guesses where to go from here, but won't, as I don't want to screw things up for you. What version of btrfs-progs do you have? -- 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
