On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 00:03, Pat Regan wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:39:48 +0200
> Xavier Nicollet wrote:
>
>> Le 26 octobre 2010 à 15:15, Pat Regan a écrit:
>> > I turned off the 5-minute snapshots and I'm now just keeping 4
>> > weekly, 7 daily, and 24 hourly snapshots alive.
>>
>> I have j
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 01:20:13AM +0100, Cláudio Martins wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 14:37:34 -0400 Josef Bacik wrote:
> > So alot of crazy people (I'm looking at you Meego) want to use btrfs on
> > phones
> > and such with small devices. Unfortunately the way we split out
> > metadata/dat
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 14:37:34 -0400 Josef Bacik wrote:
> So alot of crazy people (I'm looking at you Meego) want to use btrfs on phones
> and such with small devices. Unfortunately the way we split out metadata/data
> chunks it makes space usage inefficient for volumes that are smaller than
> 1gi
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:39:48 +0200
Xavier Nicollet wrote:
> Le 26 octobre 2010 à 15:15, Pat Regan a écrit:
> > I turned off the 5-minute snapshots and I'm now just keeping 4
> > weekly, 7 daily, and 24 hourly snapshots alive.
>
> I have just rebooted and I am going with /15 minutes interval.
>
Hello,
Here is part 2 of my outstanding patches, they are in
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-work.git for-chris
and have just the disk space caching stuff and the mixed block groups patches.
It should apply cleanly onto the bug-fixes branch. I would have combined them
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 07:17:16PM -0700, Erik Jensen wrote:
> One of my drives on my six drive btrfs setup recently died. I
> initially wasn't too worried about it, since both my data and metadata
> are raid1. However, I have so far not been able to remove the missing
> drive after several attem
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 02:29:39PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> This patch adds the incompat flag for the space cache inode stuff. Eventually
> we'll want to turn this feature on at mkfs time, but for now lets let it
> settle
> a bit first. Thanks,
>
> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik
> ---
> ctree.
do the resulting semantics match (or resemble) the semantics provided
by other facilities that allow non-superusers to mount and unmount
file systems?
If all "user mountable file systems" are provided either by the FUSE
layer (but that is concerned with providing the FS, not mounting it)
or by set
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 03:40:13PM +0800, liubo wrote:
> Hi, Chris,
>
> We've found several tiny problems while reading btrfs code.
>
> These problems are mainly about uncheck return value or BUG_ON check.
> They really have an impact on codes' quality, though they will not be
> hit in normal c
On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 02:43 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:42:04AM +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 10:39 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > There are lots of places where we do dentry->d_parent->d_inode without
> > > holding
> > > the dentry->d_lock. This cou
10 matches
Mail list logo