On 05/20/2013 08:59 PM, Duncan wrote:
Then I ran into hardware issues that turned out to be bad caps on my
8- year-old mobo (tho it was dual-socket first-gen opteron, which I
had upgraded to top-of-its-line dual-core Opteron 290s, thus four
cores @ 2.8 GHz, with 8 gigs RAM, so it wasn't as perf
George Mitchell posted on Mon, 20 May 2013 19:17:39 -0700 as excerpted:
> Duncan, The problem affects btrfs volumes that span multiple drive. If
> you are using btrfs on a single drive that works just fine. But in a
> multidrive situation, sometimes it works (when umount guesses the right
> dev
On May 20, 2013, at 7:08 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Chris Murphy posted on Sun, 19 May 2013 12:18:19 -0600 as excerpted:
>
>> It seems inconsistent that mount and unmount allows a /dev/ designation,
>> but only mount honors label and UUID.
>
> Yes.
I'm going to contradict mys
From: Wei Yongjun
Fix to return error code instead always return 0 from function
btrfs_check_trunc_cache_free_space().
Introduced by commit 7b61cd92242542944fc27024900c495a6a7b3396
(Btrfs: don't use global block reservation for inode cache truncation)
Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun
---
fs/btrfs/fr
zwu.kernel posted on Mon, 20 May 2013 23:11:22 +0800 as excerpted:
> The patchset is trying to introduce hot relocation support
> for BTRFS. In hybrid storage environment, when the data in rotating disk
> get hot, it can be relocated to nonrotating disk by BTRFS hot relocation
> support automatica
Duncan, The problem affects btrfs volumes that span multiple drive. If
you are using btrfs on a single drive that works just fine. But in a
multidrive situation, sometimes it works (when umount guesses the right
device name) and sometimes it fails (when umount guesses the wrong
device name).
Chris Murphy posted on Sun, 19 May 2013 12:18:19 -0600 as excerpted:
> On May 19, 2013, at 5:15 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
>
>> From a user perspective btrfs subvolumes have a lot in common with just
>> regular directories aka folders, and nothing in common with
>> (block)devices.
>> "Describing
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 01:20:34PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> I'm not sure how the numbering is supposed to work now that we've split
> everything out so I'm just going with the next number in the directory. This
> is
> a regression test for btrfs send, we had a problem where we'd try to send a
I'm not sure how the numbering is supposed to work now that we've split
everything out so I'm just going with the next number in the directory. This is
a regression test for btrfs send, we had a problem where we'd try to send a file
that had been deleted in the source snapshot. This is just to ma
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:48:54AM -0600, Wang Shilong wrote:
> Hello Josef,
> It seems you missed Reported-by in changelog~_~
>
Yup I'll fix it up in my tree, thanks,
Josef
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kerne
Hello Josef,
It seems you missed Reported-by in changelog~_~
Thanks,
Wang
Josef Bacik 编写：
>This fixes bugzilla 57491. If we take a snapshot of a fs with a unlink ongoing
>and then try to send that root we will run into problems. When comparing with
>a
>parent root we will search the parents
This fixes bugzilla 57491. If we take a snapshot of a fs with a unlink ongoing
and then try to send that root we will run into problems. When comparing with a
parent root we will search the parents and the send roots commit_root, which if
we've just created the snapshot will include the file that
From: Zhi Yong Wu
Add one private thread for hot relocation. It will check
if there're some extents which is hotter than the threshold
and queue them at first, if no, it will return and wait for
its next turn; otherwise, it will check if nonrotating disk
ratio is beyond its usage threshold, if
From: Zhi Yong Wu
The patchset as RFC is sent out mainly to see if its design
goes in the correct development direction.
When working on this feature, i am trying to change as less
the existing btrfs code as possible. After V0 was sent out,
i carefully checked the patchset for speed profile,
From: Zhi Yong Wu
Add three proc interfaces hot-reloc-interval, hot-reloc-threshold,
and hot-reloc-max-items under the dir /proc/sys/fs/ in order to
turn HOT_RELOC_INTERVAL, HOT_RELOC_THRESHOLD, and HOT_RELOC_MAX_ITEMS
into be tunable.
Signed-off-by: Zhi Yong Wu
---
fs/btrfs/hot_relocate.c |
From: Zhi Yong Wu
Add one new mount option '-o hot_move' for hot
relocation support. When hot relocation is enabled,
hot tracking will be enabled automatically.
Its usage looks like:
mount -o hot_move
mount -o nouser,hot_move
mount -o nouser,hot_move,loop
mount -o hot_move,nou
From: Zhi Yong Wu
Introduce one new block group BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA_NONROT,
which is used to differentiate if the block space is reserved
and allocated from one rotating disk or nonrotating disk.
Signed-off-by: Zhi Yong Wu
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h| 33 ---
fs/btrfs/ext
From: Zhi Yong Wu
Add one list_head field 'reloc_list' to accommodate
hot relocation support.
Signed-off-by: Zhi Yong Wu
---
fs/hot_tracking.c| 1 +
include/linux/hot_tracking.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/hot_tracking.c b/fs/hot_tracking.c
index 46d2
Dear BTRFS-Community,
this patch is a reworked one of the debian-original to address the latest
changes in the btrfs-tools source code.
It fixes problems that can occur when you boot a machine with btrfs root
filesystem.
Boot can stop, because fsck of the btrfs-root-filesystem fails.
Here the
Dear BTRFS-Community,
as far as I understand I believe it would make sense to apply that one upstream:
like described, it ... Fixes FTBFS on alpha and ia64 ...
>cat 02-ftbfs.patch
Authors:
Luca Bruno
Alexander Kurtz
Daniel Baumann
Description:
Patch to properly cast and avoiding compile
On 19/05/13 20:34, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On May 19, 2013, at 12:59 PM, Martin wrote:
>>
>> btrfs-raid offers a greater variety and far greater flexibility of
>> raid options individually for filedata and metadata at the
>> filesystem level.
>
> Well it really doesn't. The btrfs raid advantages l
21 matches
Mail list logo
