On 15/10/2013, at 4:05 PM, David Madden wrote:
> I haven't looked at the wiki carefully enough to understand this, but
> could one reasonably back up the snapshots of one BTRFS filesystem to
> an independent BTRFS filesystem, in a more efficient way than just
> dump/restore or cpio or something?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14-Oct-2013 21:53 , Roman Mamedov wrote:
> Sure, that's one of the more awesome uses of btrfs.
>
> But keep in mind that old snapshots on the same FS are not to be
> used instead of a proper backup to external media/servers. If a
> block happened n
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 21:05:33 -0700
David Madden wrote:
> I'd like to use BTRFS to do something like the old NetApp snapshot
> system: every hour or so, there'd be a snapshot, then the 23 of the
> snapshots during a day would be deleted, leaving just a day snapshot,
> then after a month, 6 of 7 sn
David Madden posted on Mon, 14 Oct 2013 21:05:33 -0700 as excerpted:
> I'd like to use BTRFS to do something like the old NetApp snapshot
> system:
> every hour or so, there'd be a snapshot, then the 23 of the snapshots
> during a day would be deleted, leaving just a day snapshot, then after a
> m
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 09:05:33PM -0700, David Madden wrote:
> I'd like to use BTRFS to do something like the old NetApp snapshot
> system: every hour or so, there'd be a snapshot, then the 23 of the
> snapshots during a day would be deleted, leaving just a day snapshot,
> then after a month, 6 of
I'd like to use BTRFS to do something like the old NetApp snapshot
system: every hour or so, there'd be a snapshot, then the 23 of the
snapshots during a day would be deleted, leaving just a day snapshot,
then after a month, 6 of 7 snapshots would be deleted, leaving just a
week snapshot, and so on
If we decrement the key type, we must reset its offset to the largest
possible offset (u64)-1. If we decrement the key's objectid, then we
must reset the key's type and offset to their largest possible values,
(u8)-1 and (u64)-1 respectively. Not doing so can make us miss an
items in the tree.
Sig
Avoid repeated tree searches by processing all inode ref items in
a leaf at once instead of processing one at a time, followed by a
path release and a tree search for a key with a decremented offset.
Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana
---
fs/btrfs/tree-log.c |5 +
1 file changed, 5
Trying:
btrfs device delete missing /
appears not to do anything for a "/" mount for where I have swapped out
a HDD:
# btrfs filesystem show
Label: 'test_btrfs_misc_5' uuid: 7d29d4e6-efdc-41dc-9aa8-e74dfbe13cc9
Total devices 2 FS bytes used 28.00KB
devid1 size 59.74GB used
I added an assert to make sure we were looking up aligned offsets for csums and
I tripped it when running xfstests. This is because log_one_extent was checking
if block_start == 0 for a hole instead of EXTENT_MAP_HOLE. This worked out fine
in practice it seems, but it adds a lot of extra work tha
On Oct 14, 2013, at 2:29 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 02:23:58PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 14, 2013, at 1:21 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>>> When /boot is on btrfs, and the default subvolume is changed, it makes the
>>> system unbootable. The basic configurat
Hi Saul,
Well, a little bigger than I expected turned into a lot bigger than I
expected. I've pushed the current code to my integration branch, but
the next step is to re-integrate it with Dave's current tree and push
out rc2.
I need to retest convert as well.
-chris
Quoting Chris Mason (2013-
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 02:23:58PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Oct 14, 2013, at 1:21 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> > When /boot is on btrfs, and the default subvolume is changed, it makes the
> > system unbootable. The basic configuration is subvolumes: boot, root, home,
> > on one btrfs v
On Oct 14, 2013, at 1:21 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> When /boot is on btrfs, and the default subvolume is changed, it makes the
> system unbootable. The basic configuration is subvolumes: boot, root, home,
> on one btrfs volume single device. The installer doesn't change the default
> subvolume
When mounting a subvolume by name, mountinfo shows the name of the subvolume.
When mounting a subvolume using subvolid it does not. Seems like a problem when
trying to determine what is mounted.
-o subvol=
# cat /proc/self/mountinfo | grep vda
43 34 0:29 /home /home rw,relatime shared:29 - btr
When /boot is on btrfs, and the default subvolume is changed, it makes the
system unbootable. The basic configuration is subvolumes: boot, root, home, on
one btrfs volume single device. The installer doesn't change the default
subvolume, it remains ID 5.
If I change the default subvolume and re
Btrfs_get_extent was not handling this case properly, add a test to make sure we
don't regress. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik
---
fs/btrfs/tests/inode-tests.c | 133 +--
1 file changed, 128 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tests/i
While trying to kill our hole extents I noticed I was seeing problems where we
seek into a file and then start writing and then try to fiemap that file later.
This is because we search for offset 0, don't find anything and so back up one
slot, which puts us at the inode ref or something like that,
Hello,
I have been seeing this behavior (on the unmounted filesystem, of course!):
date && time btrfs-convert /dev/mapper/bakfs
Sat Oct 12 23:13:21 CDT 2013
creating btrfs metadata.
error during copy_inodes -1
conversion aborted.
real43m1.076s
user15m25.256s
sys 0m21.508s
This is 1
Hi Saul,
Sorry for the delay, I'll push the patch out this afternoon.
-chris
Quoting Saul Wold (2013-10-14 11:25:28)
> On 10/01/2013 06:18 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
> > Hi Saul,
> >
> > The patch ended up a little bigger than I expected because it is sharing
> > infrastructure with btfs-convert.
On 10/01/2013 06:18 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
Hi Saul,
The patch ended up a little bigger than I expected because it is sharing
infrastructure with btfs-convert. Travel added a little more delay, but I'm
almost there.
Any news on this patch?
Sau!
-chris
Use memdup_user rather than duplicating its implementation
This is a little bit restricted to reduce false positives
The semantic patch that makes this report is available
in scripts/coccinelle/api/memdup_user.cocci.
More information about semantic patching is available at
http://coccinelle.lip6.
Use memdup_user rather than duplicating its implementation
This is a little bit restricted to reduce false positives
The semantic patch that makes this report is available
in scripts/coccinelle/api/memdup_user.cocci.
More information about semantic patching is available at
http://coccinelle.lip6.
2013/10/14 Josef Bacik :
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 07:03:12PM -0300, Geyslan Gregório Bem wrote:
>> 2013/10/11 Stefan Behrens :
>> > On 10/11/2013 20:35, Geyslan G. Bem wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In add_inode_ref() function:
>> >>
>> >> Initializes local pointers.
>> >>
>> >> Reduces the logical condition
This has been committed.
Thanks
--Rich
commit e15d36e67c9bd5f6cafe48f6fc3cef9bb8685e80
Author: Stefan Behrens
Date: Fri Sep 13 10:27:21 2013 +
xfstests: btrfs/011 improvement for compressed filesystems
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 07:03:12PM -0300, Geyslan Gregório Bem wrote:
> 2013/10/11 Stefan Behrens :
> > On 10/11/2013 20:35, Geyslan G. Bem wrote:
> >>
> >> In add_inode_ref() function:
> >>
> >> Initializes local pointers.
> >>
> >> Reduces the logical condition with the __add_inode_ref() return
>
Comparison of an inode's last modified transaction with the last committed
transaction is incorrect. Fix it.
Signed-off-by: chandan
---
fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c b/fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c
index c702cb6..1a3
This has been committed.
Thanks
--Rich
commit 65d4646af1f84883857a60ab00629145b5972b04
Author: Eric Sandeen
Date: Sun Aug 4 20:12:31 2013 +
xfstests btrfs/012: test btrfs-convert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to ma
On 14.10.2013, at 03:16, Wang Shilong wrote:
> On 10/14/2013 06:01 AM, Marius Kittelmann wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> after a power outage, I can't mount one of my btrfs fs anymore.
>> The mount output is:
>>
>> [root@absolut ~]# mount /dev/mapper/wdb
>> mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superbl
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 11:54:42PM -0300, Rogério Brito wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I am seriously considering employing btrfs on my systems, particularly due
> to some space-saving features that it has (namely, deduplication and
> compression).
>
> In fact, I was (a few moments ago) trying to back up some
30 matches
Mail list logo
