Excerpts from Alexey A Nikitin's message of 2011-03-10 12:30:54 -0500:
> 2011/3/10 Chris Mason
> >
> > Which kernel were you on? Was btrfs directly accessing the disks or
> > were things like LVM in use?
> > Recent kernels (.37 and higher) have improved support for barriers in
> > LVM and friends
2011/3/10 Chris Mason
>
> Which kernel were you on? Was btrfs directly accessing the disks or
> were things like LVM in use?
> Recent kernels (.37 and higher) have improved support for barriers in
> LVM and friends, but btrfs directly using the disks should have been
> safe for a long time.
Now
Excerpts from Peter Stuge's message of 2011-03-10 08:45:09 -0500:
> Chris Mason wrote:
> > Which tool and which version of the tool did you use to delete the
> > partition?
>
> fdisk from util-linux-2.18
Straight from util-linux, or with distro patches?
>
> The non-working partition was deleted
Excerpts from Peter Stuge's message of 2011-03-10 08:29:37 -0500:
> Chris Mason wrote:
> > Cutting the power isn't problem unless you're using something
> > where cache flushes are not supported.
>
> Nod. I've had very abrupt system outage before, without problems.
>
> > Which kernel were you on?
Chris Mason wrote:
> Which tool and which version of the tool did you use to delete the
> partition?
fdisk from util-linux-2.18
The non-working partition was deleted and the current one created
with fdisk from util-linux-2.14.2.
> > It's a 64GB CF card with two partitions; one 40MB ext2 and "th
Chris Mason wrote:
> Cutting the power isn't problem unless you're using something
> where cache flushes are not supported.
Nod. I've had very abrupt system outage before, without problems.
> Which kernel were you on?
2.6.38-rc6 + wireless-testing.git
> Was btrfs directly accessing the disks
Excerpts from Peter Stuge's message of 2011-03-10 01:23:33 -0500:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Chris Mason wrote:
> > > I ran btrfsctl resize -r -3gb /dev/sda2 using wireless-testing.git
> > > based on 2.6.38-rc6 and all seemed good. df reported reduced size so
> > > I repartitioned and rebooted. Filesystem ca
Excerpts from Peter Stuge's message of 2011-03-10 01:23:33 -0500:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Chris Mason wrote:
> > > I ran btrfsctl resize -r -3gb /dev/sda2 using wireless-testing.git
> > > based on 2.6.38-rc6 and all seemed good. df reported reduced size so
> > > I repartitioned and rebooted. Filesystem ca
Excerpts from Peter Stuge's message of 2011-03-08 01:52:55 -0500:
> Hi,
>
> Alexey A Nikitin wrote:
> > I went experimenting with btrfs RAID0 on my USB setup .. because
> > I'm a reckless experimenter when it doesn't involve production
> > systems.
>
> I encountered the same broken root node issu
Excerpts from liubo's message of 2011-03-10 03:50:27 -0500:
> On 03/07/2011 10:13 AM, liubo wrote:
> > btrfs will remove unused block groups after balance.
> > When a empty filesystem is balanced, the block group with tag "DATA" may be
> > dropped, and after umount and mount again, it will not find
Well, the missing file-system checker is the main reason I don't use
btrfs in production environments.
The other issue are servere performance problems in corner cases (e.g.
when deleting 15GB data takes 100% cpu and hours)
- Clemens
2011/3/8 Peter Stuge :
> Hi,
>
> Alexey A Nikitin wrote:
>> I w
On 03/07/2011 10:13 AM, liubo wrote:
> btrfs will remove unused block groups after balance.
> When a empty filesystem is balanced, the block group with tag "DATA" may be
> dropped, and after umount and mount again, it will not find "DATA" space_info
> and lead to OOPS.
> So we initial the necessary
12 matches
Mail list logo
