(cc: btrfs list added)
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:09:13AM -0800, Sorin wrote:
Hardware:
Intel Core i7, 8 GB RAM, SATA3 HDD with 3 partitions: EXT4 (/boot),
BTRFS (/) with encrypted home folder, SWAP
OS:
Ubuntu 10.10 Desktop 64bit, with Kernel 2.6.35-24-generic
I would suggest trying
于 2011-1-19 23:52, Chris Mason 写道:
Excerpts from Josef Bacik's message of 2011-01-19 09:14:02 -0500:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:08:13PM +0800, Liuwenyi wrote:
In Yang Ruirui's mail, the btrfs will create a oops. This is caused by a
null pointer in test_range_bit() while lock the spinlock.
So,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Maybe it is a very stupid question but I want to ask it anyway. In
general, 'btrfs filesystem balance' takes very long to finish and
produces lots of IO. So what are the classical usage scenarios, when
it is (really) worth doing a balance?
Hallo, Andreas,
Du meintest am 20.01.11:
Maybe it is a very stupid question but I want to ask it anyway. In
general, 'btrfs filesystem balance' takes very long to finish and
produces lots of IO. So what are the classical usage scenarios, when
it is (really) worth doing a balance?
Here
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 03:53:41PM +0100, Andreas Philipp wrote:
On 20.01.2011 14:39, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 02:07:23PM +0100, Andreas Philipp wrote:
Hi,
Maybe it is a very stupid question but I want to ask it anyway. In
general, 'btrfs filesystem balance' takes very
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 07:05:52AM -0800, Carl Cook wrote:
Does BTRFS have subvolume encryption built in? If not, why?
Not at the moment.
My opinion on why: Getting crypto right is *hard*. There are far
easier features that people are asking for that we can implement
first.
There
On Thursday, January 20, 2011 14:40:00 Helmut Hullen wrote:
Hallo, Andreas,
Du meintest am 20.01.11:
Maybe it is a very stupid question but I want to ask it anyway. In
general, 'btrfs filesystem balance' takes very long to finish and
produces lots of IO. So what are the classical usage
Hi everyone,
I am very interested in the features provided by btrfs.
I know it is still under active development and thus do not consider using it
yet in production, but the Wikipedia page describing btrfs contains a very
frightening sentence:
Edward Shiskin, one of the Reiser4 developers now
Well I've just tried to add a disk to another, but it fails. I created the
first (starting with no traditional partitions) with:
# mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb
Then I mounted it to /media/backups and put lots of files on it. I shut down
the system, added another disk. Set it up with:
# mkfs.btrfs
Excerpts from Benoît Thiébault's message of 2011-01-20 16:06:21 -0500:
Hi everyone,
I am very interested in the features provided by btrfs.
I know it is still under active development and thus do not consider using it
yet in production, but the Wikipedia page describing btrfs contains a
Excerpts from Andreas Philipp's message of 2011-01-20 08:07:23 -0500:
Hi,
Maybe it is a very stupid question but I want to ask it anyway. In
general, 'btrfs filesystem balance' takes very long to finish and
produces lots of IO. So what are the classical usage scenarios, when
it is
Excerpts from Paul Komkoff's message of 2011-01-19 17:31:56 -0500:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:25 PM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
The defrag code doesn't actually defrag. It opens up the file and
recows all the extents and then the delayed allocation code jumps in and
makes the
I must have done something wrong because for the past week or so, almost none
of my questions have been answered here. I'm pretty much in trouble now
because I have -no- backups, as I cannot get my backup server running, as I've
put all my eggs in the btrfs basket. Am I asking things wrong,
Still getting btrfsck errors with this:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git
# ./btrfstest.sh
Using /mnt/sdb1 /dev/sdb1 on /dev/sdb
+ mkfs.btrfs -L BTRFStest /dev/sdb1
WARNING! - Btrfs v0.19-35-g1b444cd IS EXPERIMENTAL
WARNING! - see
Still getting btrfs subvolume list errors with this source:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git
I create ten snapshots, and after creating the tenth one, the sixth one
disappears from btrfs subvolume list:
# btrfs subvolume list /mnt/sdb1
ID 256 top
I was just moving a 40 GB directory across subvolume boundaries, that is
/mnt/extern/mac to /mnt/extern/backup/homes/mac backup being a
subvolume.
I noticed that df will start to show more used space (starting at 130 GB
going slowly to 165 GB for the whole disk) then shortly after the
operation is
(2011/01/21 1:09), Josef Bacik wrote:
I'd rather we go through and have these things return an error than do a
BUG_ON(). We're moving towards a more stable BTRFS, not one that panics more
often :).
Yes, I also think so.
This patch is my first step.
My modification policy is as follows:
1.
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Ian! D. Allen idal...@idallen.ca wrote:
Still getting btrfsck errors with this:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git
# ./btrfstest.sh
Using /mnt/sdb1 /dev/sdb1 on /dev/sdb
+ mkfs.btrfs -L BTRFStest /dev/sdb1
WARNING!
On 01/21/2011 12:09 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 03:19:37PM +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
The error check of btrfs_start_transaction() is added, and the mistake
of the error check on several places is corrected.
I'd rather we go through and have these things return an error
07:01, Ian! D. Allen wrote:
Still getting btrfs subvolume list errors with this source:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git
Just because the fix hasn't been merged into the git tree..
I create ten snapshots, and after creating the tenth one, the
Thanks for your answer
Le 20 janv. 2011 à 22:20, Chris Mason a écrit :
There was a bug fixed as part of that discussion, and I think I also
better described the way the tree balancing works to Edward.
Maybe the wikipedia article should be modified then, because it is not very
reinsuring :-)
(2011/01/21 8:47), Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
(2011/01/21 1:09), Josef Bacik wrote:
I'd rather we go through and have these things return an error than do a
BUG_ON(). We're moving towards a more stable BTRFS, not one that panics more
often :).
Yes, I also think so.
This patch is my first step.
Btrfs has its own wiki page at https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org which you
may find more helpful than what is on wikipedia.
2011/1/20 Benoît Thiébault benoit.thieba...@gmail.com:
Thanks for your answer
Le 20 janv. 2011 à 22:20, Chris Mason a écrit :
There was a bug fixed as part of that
On Friday 21 of January 2011 00:10:54 Carl Cook wrote:
On Thu 20 January 2011 14:13:22 Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
To add another disk you don't have to run mkfs.btrfs. For example:
# add the first disk
mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb
# mount the disk
mount /dev/sdb /media/backups
# add
Hallo, Goffredo,
Du meintest am 20.01.11:
To add another disk you don't have to run mkfs.btrfs. For example:
# add the first disk
mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb
# mount the disk
mount /dev/sdb /media/backups
# add another disk to the first one
btrfs device add /dev/sdc /media/backup
Hallo, Carl,
Du meintest am 20.01.11:
If you shutdown the system, at the reboot you should scan all the
device in order to find the btrfs ones
# find the btrfs device
btrfs device scan
This must be done at every boot?
Yes - this advice is added in the Wiki (?).
If so, where is
26 matches
Mail list logo
