Re: [PATCH 4/4] btrfs-progs: change -t option for subvolume list to print a simple space-separated table (making it machine-readable)

On 2015-10-03 11:56, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: > On 2015-10-02 18:41, a...@tty0.ch wrote: >> Old implementation used tabs "\t", and tried to work around problems >> by guessing amount of tabs needed (e.g. "\t\t" after top level", with >> buggy output as soon as empty uuids are printed). This

Re: btrfs send -c fails saying "parent determination failed"

On 2015-09-30 00:20, Paride Legovini wrote: > Hi, > > btrfs send -c stopped working for me several months ago. [...] Hi again, my previous email didn't get any reply, maybe it was too long. I try to summarize: btrfs send -c | btrfs receive always fails for me with "parent determination failed"

btrfs-progs: bugs in "subvolume list" command

While digging deeper into the "subvolume list" command, I found some flaws which I'm addressing here: 1. The "parent id" seems to be a relict of old days. btrfs-subvolume(8) states: "If -p is given, then parent is added to the output between ID and top level. The parent's ID may be used at

Re: btrfs send -c fails saying "parent determination failed"

Hi, I have the same problem here. I'd love to stop using rsync in place of send recieve. As with Paride my _working_ scripts just stop functioning... Thanks Ed on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 6:20:11 PM EDT, Paride Legovini wrote: Hi, btrfs send -c stopped working for me several months

Re: [PATCH 4/4] btrfs-progs: change -t option for subvolume list to print a simple space-separated table (making it machine-readable)

On 2015-10-03 11:56, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: > On 2015-10-02 18:41, a...@tty0.ch wrote: >> Old implementation used tabs "\t", and tried to work around problems >> by guessing amount of tabs needed (e.g. "\t\t" after top level", with >> buggy output as soon as empty uuids are printed). This will

raid5 + HDFS

On Saturday, October 3, 2015, Martin Tippmann > wrote: 2015-10-03 0:07 GMT+02:00 Jim Dowling : > Hi Hi, I'm not a btrfs developer but we run HDFS on top of btrfs (mainly due

[PATCH v2] Btrfs: Check metadata redundancy on balance

Currently BTRFS allows you to make bad choices of data and metadata levels. For example -d raid1 -m raid0 means you can only use half your total disk space, but will loose everything if 1 disk fails. It should give a warning in these cases. This patch is a follow up to [PATCH v2] btrfs-progs:

[PATCH v3 2/2] btrfs: Fix lost-data-profile caused by balance bg

Reproduce: (In integration-4.3 branch) TEST_DEV=(/dev/vdg /dev/vdh) TEST_DIR=/mnt/tmp umount "$TEST_DEV" >/dev/null mkfs.btrfs -f -d raid1 "${TEST_DEV[@]}" mount -o nospace_cache "$TEST_DEV" "$TEST_DIR" btrfs balance start -dusage=0 $TEST_DIR btrfs filesystem usage $TEST_DIR dd

[PATCH v3 1/2] btrfs: Fix lost-data-profile caused by auto removing bg

Reproduce: (In integration-4.3 branch) TEST_DEV=(/dev/vdg /dev/vdh) TEST_DIR=/mnt/tmp umount "$TEST_DEV" >/dev/null mkfs.btrfs -f -d raid1 "${TEST_DEV[@]}" mount -o nospace_cache "$TEST_DEV" "$TEST_DIR" umount "$TEST_DEV" mount -o nospace_cache "$TEST_DEV" "$TEST_DIR" btrfs filesystem

[PATCH v3 0/2] btrfs: Fix lost-data-profile caused by auto removing bg and balance bg

Sorry for sending v3 late for I'm in my holiday(until 10/7). But it is necessary to send out in time because I wish to end this bug in v4.3 release. Changelog v2->v3: 1: Use list_is_singular() instead of block_group->list.next == block_group->list.prev Suggested-by: Jeff Mahoney

Re: [PATCH 4/4] btrfs-progs: change -t option for subvolume list to print a simple space-separated table (making it machine-readable)

On 2015-10-03 12:09, Axel Burri wrote: > > > On 2015-10-03 11:56, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: >> On 2015-10-02 18:41, a...@tty0.ch wrote: >>> Old implementation used tabs "\t", and tried to work around problems >>> by guessing amount of tabs needed (e.g. "\t\t" after top level", with >>> buggy

Re: BTRFS as image store for KVM?

Russell Coker posted on Sat, 03 Oct 2015 18:32:17 +1000 as excerpted: > Last time I checked a BTRFS RAID-1 filesystem would assign each process > to read from one disk based on it's PID. Every RAID-1 implementation > that has any sort of performance optimisation will allow a single > process

Re: RAID5 doesn't mount on boot, but you can afterwards?

guido_kuenne posted on Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:53:46 +0200 as excerpted: > Beginner here, so just if it helps: My two-device raid 1 mounts on boot > in Fedora 22 (uuid in fstab, no further devices specified) but I mount > the fs via uuid while Sjoerd mounted subvolumes. From what I understand > (not

Re: [PATCH 4/4] btrfs-progs: change -t option for subvolume list to print a simple space-separated table (making it machine-readable)

Goffredo Baroncelli posted on Sat, 03 Oct 2015 19:41:33 +0200 as excerpted: > On 2015-10-03 12:09, Axel Burri wrote: >> >> >> On 2015-10-03 11:56, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: >>> On 2015-10-02 18:41, a...@tty0.ch wrote: Old implementation used tabs "\t", and tried to work around problems

Re: BTRFS as image store for KVM?

On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 10:07:24 PM Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote: > > ARC presumably worked better than the other Solaris caching options. It > > was ported to Linux with zfsonlinux because that was the easy way of > > doing it. > > Actually, I think part of that was also the fact that ZFS is a COW >