It worked. I missed the point that in mediawiki a
link-to-the-new page will create a new-page.
Further I hope the new contents created on btrfs.ipv5.de
will be merged with btrfs.wiki.kernel.org when the latter
is ready.
thanks, Anand
On Wednesday 25,January,2012 03:29 PM, Arne Jansen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:27:57AM +0100, Waxhead wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From what I have read BTRFS does replace a bad copy of data with a
> known good copy (if it has one).
Correct.
> Will BTRFS try to repair the corrupt data or will it simply silently
> restore the data without the user knowing
On 1/26/2012 9:59 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:27:57AM +0100, Waxhead wrote:
[...]
>> Will BTRFS try to repair the corrupt data or will it simply silently
>> restore the data without the user knowing that a file has been
>> "fixed"?
>
>No, it'll just return the good copy
James posted on Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:17:53 -0800 as excerpted:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
>> Why not just create the filesystem as RAID-1 in the first place?
>>
>> # mkfs.btrfs -d raid1 -m raid1 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1
>
> As I said, I've only got two working drives large
Dirk Lutzebaeck posted on Sun, 22 Jan 2012 16:05:14 +0100 as excerpted:
> I have setup a RAID1 using 3 devices (500G each) on separate disks.
> After removing one disk physically the filesystem cannot be mounted in
> degraded nor in recovery mode.
> - latest kernel 3.2.1 and btrfs-tools on xubunt
I was looking at the clone range ioctl and have some remarks:
On 27.01.2011 09:46, Li Zefan wrote:
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> index f87552a..1b61dab 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> @@ -1788,7 +1788,10 @@ static noinline long btrfs_ioctl_clone(st
I'm currently researching an upgrade to (raid1-ed) btrfs from mostly
reiserfs (which I've found quite reliable (even thru a period of bad ram
and resulting system crashes) since data=ordered went in with 2.6.16 or
whatever it was. (Thanks, Chris! =:^)) on multiple md/raid-1s. I have
some ques
make_btrfs() function takes a size of filesystem as an argument. It uses this
value to set the size of the first device as well which is wrong for
filesystems larger than this device. It results in 'attemp to access beyond end
of device' messages from the kernel. So add size of the first device as
wait_log_commit() and wait_for_writer() were using slightly different
conditions for deciding whether they should call schedule() and whether they
should continue in the wait loop. Thus it could happen that we busylooped when
the first condition was not true while the second one was. That is burnin
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 02:52:32PM +0100, Jan Schmidt wrote:
> I was looking at the clone range ioctl and have some remarks:
>
> On 27.01.2011 09:46, Li Zefan wrote:
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> > index f87552a..1b61dab 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs
btree_releasepage is a callback and can be passed unknown gfp flags and then
they may end up in kmem_cache_alloc called from alloc_extent_state, slab
allocator will BUG_ON when there is HIGHMEM or DMA32 flag set.
This may happen when btrfs is mounted from a loop device, which masks out
__GFP_IO fl
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 05:11:36PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> wait_log_commit() and wait_for_writer() were using slightly different
> conditions for deciding whether they should call schedule() and whether they
> should continue in the wait loop. Thus it could happen that we busylooped when
> the fir
Stefan Behrens wrote:
On 1/26/2012 9:59 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:27:57AM +0100, Waxhead wrote:
[...]
Will BTRFS try to repair the corrupt data or will it simply silently
restore the data without the user knowing that a file has been
"fixed"?
No, it'll just return t
> So if I for example edit a text file three times and store it I can get the
> following.
> Version1: I currently like cheese
> Version2: I currently like onions
> Version3: I currently like apples
> As far as I understand a disk corruption might result in me suddenly liking
> onions (or even chee
cwillu wrote:
So if I for example edit a text file three times and store it I can get the
following.
Version1: I currently like cheese
Version2: I currently like onions
Version3: I currently like apples
As far as I understand a disk corruption might result in me suddenly liking
onions (or even ch
[fixed the silly typo in subject]
From: David Sterba
btree_releasepage is a callback and can be passed unknown gfp flags and then
they may end up in kmem_cache_alloc called from alloc_extent_state, slab
allocator will BUG_ON when there is HIGHMEM or DMA32 flag set.
This may happen when btrfs is
Just wondering,
Why is this command called 'df' when it reports total space and used
space but not free space? Wouldn't this be more aptly named 'btrfs
filesystem du' ?
It's been my understanding that traditionally 'df' has been to display
free space remaining (as well as total available and use
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Wes wrote:
> Just wondering,
>
> Why is this command called 'df' when it reports total space and used
> space but not free space? Wouldn't this be more aptly named 'btrfs
> filesystem du' ?
> It's been my understanding that traditionally 'df' has been to display
> I don't know much of what goes on inside BtrFS, but I like to point
> out that btrfs fi df doesn't actually report total space on the disk,
> only the total space currently allocated.
Good point, and this also supports the notion that it's more of a 'du'
work-alike than a 'df' one
--
To unsubsc
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 01:06:38PM +1100, Wes wrote:
> > I don't know much of what goes on inside BtrFS, but I like to point
> > out that btrfs fi df doesn't actually report total space on the disk,
> > only the total space currently allocated.
>
>
> Good point, and this also supports the notion
20 matches
Mail list logo
