On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 3:49 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 12:32 AM Dave T wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 2:03 PM Chris Murphy
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:54 PM Dave T wrote:
> > > >
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 2:03 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:54 PM Dave T wrote:
> >
> > # btrfs check -r 2853787942912 /dev/mapper/xyz
> > Opening filesystem to check...
> > parent transid verify failed on 2853787942912 wanted 29436 found 2
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 10:04 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 5:15 AM Dave T wrote:
> >
> > I hope to get some expert advice before I proceed. I don't want to
> > make things worse. Here's my situation now:
> >
> > This p
I hope to get some expert advice before I proceed. I don't want to
make things worse. Here's my situation now:
This problem is with an external USB drive and it is encrypted.
cryptsetup open succeeds. But mount fails.k
mount /backup
mount: /backup: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblo
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 2:33 AM Dave T wrote:
>
> I hope to get some expert advice before I proceed. I don't want to
> make things worse. Here's my situation now:
>
> This problem is with an external USB drive and it is encrypted.
> cryptsetup open succeeds. But
The filesystem has become very, very slow. smartctl doesn't show any
problems with the HDD. My usual btrfs maintenance (balance, scrub,
defrag) did not show any problems -- but did not resolve the slowness.
So I ran a btrfs check -- the result is pasted below. What causes this
and is there any solu
What I have gathered so far is the following:
1. my RAM is not faulty and I feel comfortable ruling out a memory
error as having anything to do with the reported problem.
2. my storage device does not seem to be faulty. I have not figured
out how to do more definitive testing, but smartctl report
Apologies. I have to make a correction to the message I just sent.
Disregard that message and use this one:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> 1. Report 'btrfs check' without --repair, let's see what it complains
> about and if it might be able to plausibly fix this.
First,
see below
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> 1. Report 'btrfs check' without --repair, let's see what it complains
> about and if it might be able to plausibly fix this.
First, a small part of the dmesg output:
[ 172.772283] Btrfs loaded
[ 172.772632] BTRFS: device label
Thanks for all the responses, guys! I really appreciate it. This
information is very helpful. I will be working through the suggestions
(e.g., check without repair) for the next hour or so. I'll report back
when I have something to report.
My drive is a Samsung 950 Pro nvme drive, which in most re
btrfs scrub returned with uncorrectable errors. Searching in dmesg
returns the following information:
BTRFS warning (device dm-0): checksum error at logical N on
/dev/mapper/[crypto] sector: y metadata node (level 2) in tree 250
it also says:
unable to fixup (regular) error at logical NN
m-crypt? Look
elsewhere for help?
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Dave T wrote:
> The original problem from 2 days ago just happened again. I ran btrfs
> rescue zero-log (again) and the root filesystem mounted but it was
> read-only on first boot. I rebooted again and everything seems normal.
Linux
btrfs-progs v4.6.1
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Dave T wrote:
> My system locked up with btrfs-transaction consuming 100% CPU and NMI
> watchdog reporting BUG: soft lockup with btrfs-transaction:314.
>
> This comes 2 days after a serious event involving BTRFS where my
> sy
had to troubleshoot it in the past. Now (because of 4 years of
problem-free operation) I'm using it on a critical production system.
I have backups, but I cannot allow these problems to go unresolved.
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Dave T poste
My system locked up with btrfs-transaction consuming 100% CPU and NMI
watchdog reporting BUG: soft lockup with btrfs-transaction:314.
This comes 2 days after a serious event involving BTRFS where my
system would not mount the root fs. (I gave details in an email to the
list two days ago and copied
15 matches
Mail list logo
