>>> [root@localhost tmp]# df
>>> Filesystem 1K-blocksUsed Available Use% Mounted on
>>> /dev/sda33746816 3193172 1564 100% /mnt/sysimage
>>> /dev/sda1 495844 31509438735 7%
>>> /mnt/sysimage/boot
>>> /dev/sda3
On Jan 11, 2013, at 11:04 PM, cwillu wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Chris Murphy
> wrote:
>> Very low priority.
>> No user data at risk.
>> 8GB virtual disk being installed to, and the installer is puking. I'm trying
>> to figure out why.
>>
>> I first get an rsync error 12, foll
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Very low priority.
> No user data at risk.
> 8GB virtual disk being installed to, and the installer is puking. I'm trying
> to figure out why.
>
> I first get an rsync error 12, followed by the installer crashing. What's
> interesting is th
Very low priority.
No user data at risk.
8GB virtual disk being installed to, and the installer is puking. I'm trying to
figure out why.
I first get an rsync error 12, followed by the installer crashing. What's
interesting is this, deleting irrelevant source file systems, just showing the
mount
On Jan 11, 2013, at 9:43 PM, Chris Carlin wrote:
>> Based on some experiences I've had, and also seen on the list recently, you
>> might be able to back out of this situation by adding another device to the
>> volume. It almost doesn't matter how big it is. It could be a small
>> partition on
On Jan 11, 2013, at 7:28 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 02:18:44AM +, Rick Liu wrote:
>>>
>>> You'll need to use something like fdisk or cfdisk to resize the
>>> partition first. With (c)fdisk, that involves deleting and recreating
>>> the partition with the same starting
truncate() vs. ftruncate() differ in the VFS; truncate()
doesn't set (ATTR_CTIME | ATTR_MTIME), and it's up to the
fs to do the timestamp updates if the size changes.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen
---
Hm, am I breaking the rules by updating the vfs inode fields
before the transaction starts?
diff
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:12:11PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 10-01-13 13:47:57, Miao Xie wrote:
> > writeback_inodes_sb(_nr)_if_idle() is re-implemented by replacing
> > down_read()
> > with down_read_trylock() because
> > - If ->s_umount is write locked, then the sb is not idle. That is
> >
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 02:18:44AM +, Rick Liu wrote:
> >
> >You'll need to use something like fdisk or cfdisk to resize the
> > partition first. With (c)fdisk, that involves deleting and recreating
> > the partition with the same starting point. (fdisk gives you more
> > control here). As
>
>You'll need to use something like fdisk or cfdisk to resize the
> partition first. With (c)fdisk, that involves deleting and recreating
> the partition with the same starting point. (fdisk gives you more
> control here). As with most low-level FS-resizing tools, btrfs fi
> resize doesn't at
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, David Sterba wrote:
> > total bytes scrubbed: 25.42GB with 2 errors
> > error details: super=2
>
> The superblock errors are detected but not corrected right away, because
> next transaction commit will overvrite it.
>
> Does scub report the errors repeatedly
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:29:47AM +, Rick Liu wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rick,
> >
> > use
> > btrfs fi resize :max
> > to make btrfs use all space of disk
> >
> [Rick Liu]
> Hi,
>
> I tried, but it seems no effect.
> (dev/sdc was 300GB and now is 500GB, )
> After resize,
> /dev/sdc1 is still 300
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> use
> btrfs fi resize :max
> to make btrfs use all space of disk
>
[Rick Liu]
Hi,
I tried, but it seems no effect.
(dev/sdc was 300GB and now is 500GB, )
After resize,
/dev/sdc1 is still 300GB.
# btrfs filesystem show
Label: 'local' uuid: 828bee8c-a28c-443f-b19a-8e65e3f949
On 12.01.2013 00:39, Rick Liu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm running OpenSUSE12.2 on VMware ESXi5.
> I create /local using BTRFS file system with 3 devices (sdc, sdd, sde).
> These 3 devices are VMware's virtual disk (vmdk files).
>
> Instead of adding another new virtual disk,
> ESXi allows to increase Vi
Hello!
A few kernel versions back, we set up a 5 disk volume which was set up as
"raid 1" data. This didn't quite go as expected, and it filled up the
first 4 disks without putting anything on the 5th. I've been trying to
balance it, lastly with: btrfs balance start -v -dconvert=single,devid=5
I
Hi,
I'm running OpenSUSE12.2 on VMware ESXi5.
I create /local using BTRFS file system with 3 devices (sdc, sdd, sde).
These 3 devices are VMware's virtual disk (vmdk files).
Instead of adding another new virtual disk,
ESXi allows to increase Virtual Disk size,
so I increase the size for 3 devices
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 05:28:22PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> Thanks for libbtrfs. comments below.
No problem, thanks for looking over and testing this out. I'll correct the
whitespace error below for my next send of the patches.
--Mark
--
Mark Fasheh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: sen
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 05:31:09PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> test case :
> make (Do not run make all)
> make install
Thanks for testing!
> generates the following error..
>
> install -m755 -d /usr/local/lib
> install libbtrfs.so.1.0 libbtrfs.so.1 libbtrfs.so /usr/local/lib
> install
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 03:34:25PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Jan 11, 2013, at 12:21 PM, Roelof Wobben wrote:
> > I have one thing I think I don't really understand about btrfs,
> >
> > Normally if I use ext4 I make a 3 partitions for my distro.
> >
> > one for boot about 1G
> > one for ho
On Jan 11, 2013, at 12:21 PM, Roelof Wobben wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have one thing I think I don't really understand about btrfs,
>
> Normally if I use ext4 I make a 3 partitions for my distro.
>
> one for boot about 1G
> one for home about 30G
> one for root for the rest of my 100G.
>
> Now
On Jan 11, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Chris Carlin wrote:
> Thanks for the response, Hugo!
>
> This hard drive is not production, so I can afford to tinker with it
> if it helps you guys track down anything interesting. Of course, I'd
> prefer to restore it rather than wipe it…
What is the result for?
> But after flipping slab code, I find that another callback will disable
> merging slabs when allocating a slab, so I'm not sure if it worth doing so...
Do you mean the find_mergeable() stuff in SLUB?
> What do you think about it?
I don't know, pass in a callback to destruction?
void kmem_cach
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Chris Carlin wrote:
> I have a week-old filesystem that is reported clean by btrfsck and
> scrub, but that fails under operations ranging from du to sync and
> umount (but no failures if mounted readonly).
>
> My problem sounds similar to a few other reports (e.g.
On Thu 10-01-13 13:47:57, Miao Xie wrote:
> writeback_inodes_sb(_nr)_if_idle() is re-implemented by replacing down_read()
> with down_read_trylock() because
> - If ->s_umount is write locked, then the sb is not idle. That is
> writeback_inodes_sb(_nr)_if_idle() needn't wait for the lock.
> - writ
Hello,
I have one thing I think I don't really understand about btrfs,
Normally if I use ext4 I make a 3 partitions for my distro.
one for boot about 1G
one for home about 30G
one for root for the rest of my 100G.
Now I wonder if I want to do the same with btrfs.
Can I do the same so make 3
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 01:13:24PM -0500, Chris Carlin wrote:
> I have a week-old filesystem that is reported clean by btrfsck and
> scrub, but that fails under operations ranging from du to sync and
> umount (but no failures if mounted readonly).
>
> My problem sounds similar to a few other repor
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 04:25:16PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:34:37PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:04:58PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> > > This strongly suggests that the warning is connected to the fixes.
> >
> > Seems that I'm not able to repr
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:11:32PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:54:26PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 10:05:39AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 12:07:34PM -0800, Zach Brown wrote:
> > > > > This is for detecting extent map leak.
> >
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:34:37PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:04:58PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> > This strongly suggests that the warning is connected to the fixes.
>
> Seems that I'm not able to reproduce the warning in running 013,
> maybe you can revert the two fixes a
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 10:46:03AM -0800, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 01:25:41PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 09:49:58AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> > > > Unfortunately my laptop deadlocks f
Mark,
test case :
make (Do not run make all)
make install
generates the following error..
install -m755 -d /usr/local/lib
install libbtrfs.so.1.0 libbtrfs.so.1 libbtrfs.so /usr/local/lib
install: cannot stat `libbtrfs.so.1.0': No such file or directory
install: cannot stat `libbtrfs.so.1': N
Thanks for libbtrfs. comments below.
On 01/09/2013 05:41 AM, Mark Fasheh wrote:
send-test.c links against libbtrfs and uses the send functionality provided
to decode and print a send stream to the console. We use the
BTRFS_SEND_FLAG_NO_FILE_DATA flag as actual file data is never needed for
t
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:06:34AM -0800, Zach Brown wrote:
> > > Hmm, I guess it's cool to get the allocation-specific decoding which you
> > > don't get from the generic kernel leak tracking?
>
> I mean that by doing this in btrfs, instead of doing it generically in
> the allocator, you get spec
33 matches
Mail list logo
