When we wrote some data by compress mode into a btrfs filesystem which was full
of the fragments, the kernel will report:
BTRFS warning (device xxx): Aborting unused transaction.
The reason is:
We can not find a long enough free space to store the compressed data because
of the fragmentary
Segmentation fault occurred in the following command.
# btrfs qgroup limit
Segmentation fault
So, we should check a minimum number of arguments.
Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh
---
cmds-qgroup.c |3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cmds-qgroup.c b/cmds-qgrou
On 09/11/2012 07:45 PM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 07:12:58PM +0800, ching wrote:
>>> 1. According to btrfs wiki, defragment a COW file will produce two
>>> unrelated files.
>>>
>>> Does it apply to the "autodefrag" mount option?
>> can anybody helps on question 1?
> The dat
On 09/11/2012 12:42 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
Wade Cline reported a problem where he was getting garbage and warnings when
writing to a preallocated range via O_DIRECT. This is because we weren't
creating our normal pinned extent_map for the range we were writing to,
which was causing all sorts of
For immutable bio vecs, I've been auditing and removing bi_idx
references. These were harmless, but removing them will make auditing
easier.
scrub_bio_end_io_worker() was open coding a bio_reset() - but this
doesn't appear to have been needed for anything as right after it does a
bio_put(), and pe
Wade Cline reported a problem where he was getting garbage and warnings when
writing to a preallocated range via O_DIRECT. This is because we weren't
creating our normal pinned extent_map for the range we were writing to,
which was causing all sorts of issues. This patch fixes the problem and
mak
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:31:23AM -0600, Wade Cline wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was doing some fragmentation tests on preallocated extents on Josef's
> btrfs-next branch (commit 8fe3b6) with the O_DIRECT flag enabled and
> noticed some strange behavior. Writing to a preallocated extent
> currently trigger
Hi,
I was doing some fragmentation tests on preallocated extents on Josef's
btrfs-next branch (commit 8fe3b6) with the O_DIRECT flag enabled and
noticed some strange behavior. Writing to a preallocated extent
currently triggers a WARN_ON on in the kernel, triggers a csum error for
what appear
This is a repost because I rebased the change. The first attempt was
done with the email "[BTRFS-PROGS][BUG][PATCH] Incorrect detection of a
removed device [was Re: “Bug”-report: inconsistency kernel <-> tools]"
dated 08/31/2012.
In the function btrfs_read_dev_super() it is possible to use th
I'm building a test file server using samba 3.6 to see if BTRFS is a good
fit. I want to stress that this is a test setup for now.
I'm trying to get an idea of the sub-volume concept and how it relates to
the LVM concept. Trying to see what might be the best practice.
I was going to create on
On 09/11/2012 07:49 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 09:10:52AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
>> This comes from one of btrfs's project ideas,
>> As we defragment files, we break any sharing from other snapshots.
>> The balancing code will preserve the sharing, and defrag needs to grow this
Users report a bug, the reproducer is:
$ mkfs.btrfs /dev/loop0
$ mount /dev/loop0 /mnt/btrfs/
$ mkdir /mnt/btrfs/dir
$ chattr +C /mnt/btrfs/dir/
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/btrfs/dir/foo bs=4K count=10;
$ lsattr /mnt/btrfs/dir/foo
---C- /mnt/btrfs/dir/foo
$ filefrag /mnt/btrfs/dir/foo
/mn
On 11.09.2012 01:38, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 2012-09-11 01:09, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
What about:
- copy first backup version
- btrfs subvol create first next
- copy next backup version
- btrfs subvol create previous next
>>>
>>> Wouldn't "btrfs subvol
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 07:12:58PM +0800, ching wrote:
> > 1. According to btrfs wiki, defragment a COW file will produce two
> > unrelated files.
> >
> > Does it apply to the "autodefrag" mount option?
>
> can anybody helps on question 1?
The data blocks associated with the files (that were
On 09/09/2012 08:03 AM, ching wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> i am new on btrfs, i am testing KVM on btrfs (host: kernel x86-64 3.5.3), the
> performance is reasonable.
>
> I have two question on defrag, can someone help me?
>
> 1. According to btrfs wiki, defragment a COW file will produce two unrelated
>
On 09/11/2012 09:28 AM, Li Zefan wrote:
>> may i ask a stupid question, if i remove my "compress-force=lzo" option,
>> will compression disabled for new written data?
> the answer is yes. :)
>
>
The problem seems fixed. The number of extent decrease to 14055 after defrag
with compression off.
--
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:35:26AM -0400, Marios Titas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Arne Jansen wrote:
> >
> > instead of applying my patch, could you please just revert
> >
> > commit 5986802c2fcc754040bb7ed95f30bb16c4a843b7
> > Author: Dan Carpenter
> > Date: Mon Jul 30 02:16:10
This is to inform you that your recent unsubscribe request was unsuccessful.
This is probably because we could find no current subscription in your name.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo i
Am Dienstag, 11. September 2012 schrieb Jan Engelhardt:
>
> On Tuesday 2012-09-11 01:09, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> >> > What about:
> >> >
> >> > - copy first backup version
> >> > - btrfs subvol create first next
> >> > - copy next backup version
> >> > - btrfs subvol create previous next
> >>
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Arne Jansen wrote:
>
> instead of applying my patch, could you please just revert
>
> commit 5986802c2fcc754040bb7ed95f30bb16c4a843b7
> Author: Dan Carpenter
> Date: Mon Jul 30 02:16:10 2012 -0600
>
> Btrfs: fix some error codes in btrfs_qgroup_inherit()
>
>
20 matches
Mail list logo
