RE: Raid 0 setup doubt.

Sorry to interject here, but I think it's a bit overreaching to suggest that swap isn't generally useful any more as a general-purpose member of the memory hierarchy > Given that swap on spinning rust is slower than real > RAM by several orders of magnitude, it'll still be far slower than

Compression causes kernel crashes if there are I/O or checksum errors (was: RE: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/volumes.c:5519 when hot-removing device in RAID-1)

Hi, After puzzling over the btrfs failure I reported here a week ago, I think there is a bad incompatibility between compression and RAID-1 (maybe other RAID levels too?). I think it is unsafe for users to use compression, at least with multiple devices until this is fixed/investigated further.

Re: Possible Raid Bug

Hi Patrik, Thanks for posting a test case. more below. On 03/26/2016 07:51 PM, Patrik Lundquist wrote: So with the lessons learned: # mkfs.btrfs -m raid10 -d raid10 /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sdd /dev/sde # mount /dev/sdb /mnt; dmesg | tail # touch /mnt/test1; sync; btrfs device usage /mnt

Re: Raid 0 setup doubt.

On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 4:35 AM, Jose Otero wrote: > Hello, > > -- > I apologize beforehand if I'm asking a too basic question for the > mailing list, or if it has been already answered at nauseam. >

Re: btrfs_destroy_inode WARN_ON.

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 06:54:11PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > Just hit this on a tree from earlier this morning, v4.5-11140 or so. > > WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 32570 at fs/btrfs/inode.c:9261 > btrfs_destroy_inode+0x389/0x3f0 [btrfs] > CPU: 2 PID: 32570 Comm: rm Not tainted 4.5.0-think+ #14 >

Re: scrub: Tree block spanning stripes, ignored

Ivan P wrote on 2016/03/27 16:31 +0200: Thanks for the reply, the raid1 array was created from scratch, so not converted from ext*. I used btrfs-progs version 4.2.3 on kernel 4.2.5 to create the array, btw. I don't remember any strange behavior after 4.0, so no clue here. Go to the

Re: Raid 0 setup doubt.

Jose Otero posted on Sun, 27 Mar 2016 12:35:43 +0200 as excerpted: > Hello, > > -- > I apologize beforehand if I'm asking a too basic question for the > mailing list, or if it has been already answered at nauseam. > --

Re: Again, no space left on device while rebalancing and recipe doesnt work

Martin Steigerwald posted on Sun, 27 Mar 2016 14:10:07 +0200 as excerpted: > On Freitag, 4. März 2016 12:31:44 CEST Duncan wrote: >> Dāvis Mosāns posted on Thu, 03 Mar 2016 17:39:12 +0200 as excerpted: >> > 2016-03-03 6:57 GMT+02:00 Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net>: >> >> You're issue isn't the

btrfs filesystem du - Failed to lookup root id - Inappropriate ioctl for device

Hi i found the descriped error in if i execute du with btrfs-progs v4.5 with kernel v4.5. floyd@nas ~ $ sudo btrfs version btrfs-progs v4.5 floyd@nas ~ $ uname -r 4.5.0-040500-generic floyd@nas ~ $ sudo btrfs fi show Label: 'RAID' uuid: 3247737b-87f9-4e8c-8db3-2beed50fb104 Total devices 4 FS

Re: csum errors in VirtualBox VDI files

On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Kai Krakow wrote: > Am Sat, 26 Mar 2016 22:57:53 -0600 > schrieb Chris Murphy : > >> On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Kai Krakow >> wrote: >> >> > Both filesystems on this PC show similar

Re: csum errors in VirtualBox VDI files

Am Sat, 26 Mar 2016 22:57:53 -0600 schrieb Chris Murphy : > On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Kai Krakow > wrote: > > > Both filesystems on this PC show similar corruption now - but they > > are connected to completely different buses (SATA3 bcache

Re: Possible Raid Bug

Yeah I think the Gotchas page would be a good place to give people a heads up. -- Stephen Williams steph...@veryfast.biz On Sat, Mar 26, 2016, at 09:58 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 8:00 AM, Stephen Williams > wrote: > > > I know this is quite a

Re: csum errors in VirtualBox VDI files

Am Sun, 27 Mar 2016 14:18:26 +0200 schrieb Martin Steigerwald : > On Dienstag, 22. März 2016 09:03:42 CEST Kai Krakow wrote: > > Hello! > > > > Since one of the last kernel updates (I don't know which exactly), > > I'm experiencing csum errors within VDI files when running >

Re: RAID Assembly with Missing Empty Drive

On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 4:59 PM, John Marrett wrote: >>> If you do want to use a newer one, I'd build against kernel.org, just >>> because the developers only use that base. And use 4.4.6 or 4.5. >> >> At this point I could remove the overlays and recover the filesystem >>

Re: RAID Assembly with Missing Empty Drive

>> If you do want to use a newer one, I'd build against kernel.org, just >> because the developers only use that base. And use 4.4.6 or 4.5. > > At this point I could remove the overlays and recover the filesystem > permanently, however I'm also deeply indebted to the btrfs community > and want to

Re: scrub: Tree block spanning stripes, ignored

On 03/27/2016 05:54 PM, Ivan P wrote: Read the info on the wiki, here's the rest of the requested information: # uname -r 4.4.5-1-ARCH # btrfs fi show Label: 'ArchVault' uuid: cd8a92b6-c5b5-4b19-b5e6-a839828d12d8 Total devices 1 FS bytes used 2.10GiB devid1 size 14.92GiB

Re: csum errors in VirtualBox VDI files

On 03/27/2016 09:50 AM, Kai Krakow wrote: Am Sat, 26 Mar 2016 20:30:35 +0100 schrieb Kai Krakow : Am Wed, 23 Mar 2016 12:16:24 +0800 schrieb Qu Wenruo : Kai Krakow wrote on 2016/03/22 19:48 +0100: Am Tue, 22 Mar 2016 16:47:10 +0800 schrieb Qu

Re: csum errors in VirtualBox VDI files

On 03/27/2016 03:30 AM, Kai Krakow wrote: Am Wed, 23 Mar 2016 12:16:24 +0800 schrieb Qu Wenruo : Kai Krakow wrote on 2016/03/22 19:48 +0100: Am Tue, 22 Mar 2016 16:47:10 +0800 schrieb Qu Wenruo : Hi, Kai Krakow wrote on 2016/03/22 09:03

Re: csum errors in VirtualBox VDI files

On Dienstag, 22. März 2016 09:03:42 CEST Kai Krakow wrote: > Hello! > > Since one of the last kernel updates (I don't know which exactly), I'm > experiencing csum errors within VDI files when running VirtualBox. A > side effect of this is, as soon as dmesg shows these errors, commands > like "du"

Re: New file system with same issue (was: Again, no space left on device while rebalancing and recipe doesnt work)

On Dienstag, 15. März 2016 08:07:22 CEST Marc Haber wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 09:39:51PM +0100, Henk Slager wrote: > > >> BTW, I restored and mounted your 20160307-fanbtr-image: > > >> > > >> [266169.207952] BTRFS: device label fanbtr devid 1 transid 22215732 > > >> /dev/loop0

Re: RAID Assembly with Missing Empty Drive

>> I was looking under btrfs device, sorry about that. I do have the >> command. I tried replace and it seemed more promising than the last >> attempt, it wrote enough data to the new drive to overflow and break >> my overlay. I'm trying it without the overlay on the destination >> device, I'll

Raid 0 setup doubt.

Hello, -- I apologize beforehand if I'm asking a too basic question for the mailing list, or if it has been already answered at nauseam. -- I have two hdd (Western Digital 750 GB approx. 700 GiB each), and I planning to set

Re: scrub: Tree block spanning stripes, ignored

..forgot to paste btrfs-version: 4.4.1 (slightly outdated, but it's the current version on arch linux) On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Ivan P wrote: > Read the info on the wiki, here's the rest of the requested information: > > # uname -r > 4.4.5-1-ARCH > > # btrfs fi

Re: scrub: Tree block spanning stripes, ignored

Read the info on the wiki, here's the rest of the requested information: # uname -r 4.4.5-1-ARCH # btrfs fi show Label: 'ArchVault' uuid: cd8a92b6-c5b5-4b19-b5e6-a839828d12d8 Total devices 1 FS bytes used 2.10GiB devid1 size 14.92GiB used 4.02GiB path /dev/sdc1 Label: 'Vault'