On 8/26/13 12:38 AM, chandan wrote:
On Sunday, August 25, 2013 11:54:30 AM Eric Sandeen wrote:
Can you explain why this is necessary?
What failures do you see, on what filesystems?
generic/255 currently fails on Btrfs on a ppc64 machine with 64k page size and
hence 64k block size.
You are out of metadata, not normal space.
However, the good question is why 0.5GB of metadata are unused and
btrfs reports no space left.
I have seen similar behaviour on a machine of mine, with exactly 0.5GB
of metadata unused.
Regards
2013/8/26 Russell Coker russ...@coker.com.au:
Linux xev
I noticed that if I tried to mount a file system with -o degraded after having
done it once already we would fail to mount. This is because the
fs_devices-missing count was getting bumped everytime we mounted, but not
getting reset whenever we unmounted. To fix this we just drop the missing
Note: this is a work in progress patch, not yet complete, not meant to
be yet taken.
The btrfs_prev_leaf function often returns the same leaf again and
a return status of 0 (success) - this is wrong for 2 reasons:
1) Shouldn't return 0 when it's the same leaf as before;
2) More importantly, it
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 02:25:09AM +0800, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
I had a RAID-1 btrfs filesystem with Linux 3.10.
After hard reset, I'm no longer able to mount it:
[ 35.254122] Btrfs loaded
[ 35.254577] device label test-btrfs devid 1 transid 97966 /dev/sda4
[ 35.254819] device
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 19:34:19 +0100
Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
corrupt 0, gen 0 [ 56.209412] parent transid verify failed on
3321036099584 wanted 97967 found 97966 [ 56.225990] parent
transid verify failed on 3321036099584 wanted 97967 found 97966
[ 56.226128] btrfs: failed
On Aug 26, 2013, at 9:27 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
I haven't tried doing a partial balance, deleting the extra device, then
finishing the balance.
Btrfs FAQ suggests a partial balance for this situation. So it's worth a try
before adding a device.
On Aug 26, 2013, at 11:41 AM, Nick Lee em...@nickle.es wrote:
There was a discussion on IRC a few days ago that the problem with the tree
root's bloco was likely the result of either an issue with the disk itself,
or the chunk tree/logical mappings. I ran the chunk recover, looked over the
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 01:10:54PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Aug 26, 2013, at 11:41 AM, Nick Lee em...@nickle.es wrote:
There was a discussion on IRC a few days ago that the problem with the tree
root's bloco was likely the result of either an issue with the disk itself,
or the
One of the complaints we get a lot is how many BUG_ON()'s we have. So to help
with this I'm introducing a kconfig option to enable/disable a new ASSERT()
mechanism much like what XFS does. This will allow us developers to still get
our nice panics but allow users/distros to compile them out.
All of these are logic checks to make sure we're not breaking anything, so
convert them over to ASSERT(). Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com
---
fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 28 ++--
1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git
On 8/26/13 3:56 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
One of the complaints we get a lot is how many BUG_ON()'s we have. So to help
with this I'm introducing a kconfig option to enable/disable a new ASSERT()
mechanism much like what XFS does. This will allow us developers to still get
our nice panics but
I don't know if removing a snapshot will necessarily help but it may be worth a
try and see if these numbers change enough to allow file deletion.
Actually the snapshots could not be removed due to the unsufficient
remaining space.
Another way out of this that's worked for some people in
With this we can
go through and convert any BUG_ON()'s that we have to catch actual programming
mistakes to the new ASSERT() and then fix everybody else to return errors.
I like the sound of that!
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
@@ -3814,6 +3814,22 @@ void btrfs_printk(const
#ifdef BTRFS_ASSERT
#define btrfs_assert(cond) BUG_ON(!(cond))
#else
#define btrfs_assert(cond) do { if (cond) ; } while (0)
#endif
I think the only downside is that the BUG_ON() won't print the
conditional that failed, IIRC.
Sure, if you wanted to go the
On Aug 26, 2013, at 3:43 PM, Matthieu Dalstein matthieu.dalst...@dalmat.net
wrote:
Thanks for the tip. I would have expected another less intrusive recovery but
this one worked well. I did not fully rebalance the fs (could have lasted
days!) but with the d/m usage balance parameters I
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Thomas Koch tho...@koch.ro wrote:
- check whether two files share the same data on disk, i.e. one has been
created by cp --reflink of the other?
How about inspecting the output of filefrag -v $filename?
For example, you could filter out with grep all lines
On Aug 26, 2013, at 1:31 PM, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
Let's assume that you don't have a physical device failure (which
is a different set of tools -- mount -odegraded, btrfs dev del
missing).
First thing to do is to take a btrfs-image -c9 -t4 of the
filesystem, and keep
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 20:01:46 +0100
Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
Anything else I can try?
Oh, hang on... that's the log tree.
btrfs-zero-log may help. If you can take a btrfs-image of the
filesystem before running that, josef would like to see it.
btrfs-zero-log did the
19 matches
Mail list logo
