On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Josef Bacik jba...@fb.com wrote:
We can deal with corrupt items by deleting them in a few cases. Fsck can
easily
recover from a missing extent item or a dir index item. So if we notice a
item
is completely bogus and it is of a key that we know we can repair
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:21 AM, M G Berberich
bt...@oss.m-berberich.de wrote:
Hello,
we are thinking about using BtrFS on standard hardware for a
fileserver with about 50T (100T raw) of storage (25×4TByte).
I would recommend carefully reading this thread titled: 1 week to
rebuid 4x 3TB
On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 11:21 PM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
But from rc5 on thru rc7 or 8 and
release, unless you're one of the ones still waiting on a bug found
earlier to be fixed, it's generally quite stable and boring.
So by the time of actual .0 release, it really is quite
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Russell Coker russ...@coker.com.au wrote:
If you regularly run a scrub with options such as -dusage=50 -musage=10 then
the amount of free space in metadata chunks will tend to be a lot greater than
that in data chunks.
Just to clarify for posterity, I'm pretty
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Peter Waller pe...@scraperwiki.com wrote:
Hi All,
My TL;DR questions are at the bottom, before the stack trace.
I'm running Ubuntu 14.04. I wonder if this problem is related to the
thread titled Machine lockup due to btrfs-transaction on AWS EC2
Ubuntu 14.04
-ed from it's
previous version.
Now that we have a working sysfs, I wonder if we could implement some
counters to track how often snapshot-aware defrag would have run. I
might be surprised at how much it was doing.
---
Regards,
Mitch Harder
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 09:29:41AM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 01:18:40AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 07:39:12PM +, Duncan wrote:
That appears to be a very good use of either
On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Marcel Partap mpar...@gmx.net wrote:
This is the BTRFS development list, right? Someone here should know how
to achieve this I hope?
#Regards
On 01/03/14 02:21, Marcel Partap wrote:
Dear BTFRS devs,
I have a 1TB btrfs volume mounted read-only since two years
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:50 AM, David Sterba dste...@suse.cz wrote:
There's a case which clone does not handle and used to BUG_ON instead,
(testcase xfstests/btrfs/035), now returns EINVAL. This error code is
confusing to the ioctl caller, as it normally signifies errorneous
arguments.
-progs. All WARN_ONs are treated the same
as BUG_ONs, and the program is halted.
Should we convert all our btrfs-progs WARN_ONs to BUG_ONs to
allow us to implement a true WARN_ON functionality?
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
kerncompat.h | 14 --
1 file
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Wang Shilong
wangsl.f...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
Hi Mitch,
On 02/25/2014 07:03 AM, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Wang Shilong
wangsl.f...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
We found btrfsck will output backrefs mismatch while the filesystem
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Wang Shilong
wangsl.f...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
We found btrfsck will output backrefs mismatch while the filesystem
is defenitely ok.
The problem is that check_block() don't return right value,which
makes btrfsck won't walk all tree blocks thus we don't get a
for max_inline=0.
This patch will allow the the max_inline mount option to accept non-zero
values as indicated in the documentation.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
fs/btrfs/super.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/super.c b
The function call that set the ret parameter evaluated in this
BUG_ON was removed in a previous commit:
11be10f71e1af5256f221feb9e91300b3e28bbef
Btrfs-progs: make fsck fix certain file extent inconsistencies
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
cmds-check.c | 1 -
1 file
Change the definition of BUG() to use assert instead of abort to
provide information about the location of the issue.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
kerncompat.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kerncompat.h b/kerncompat.h
index
that could be returned while processing the leaf.
The only caller of this function (walk_down_tree) would ignore
the return value anyway. But this patch will correct the
behaviour in case future changes intend to utilize the return
value.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
Convert the instances of BUG() to BUG_ON(1) to provide information
about the location of the abort.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
btrfs-debug-tree.c | 4 ++--
ctree.c| 20 ++--
ctree.h| 2 +-
disk-io.c | 4
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 3:22 PM, David Sterba dste...@suse.cz wrote:
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 12:34:08PM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
Convert the instances of BUG() to BUG_ON(1) to provide information
about the location of the abort.
kerncompat.h:
#define BUG() abort()
#define BUG_ON(c
I received a btrfs page allocation failure on my 3.12.7 kernel which
is merged with Chris' for-linus branch for the 3.13_rc kernel.
I have several btrfs partitions mounted, but I believe this error is
on my btrfs root partition.
Several things were going on at the same time on this partition. I
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Mitch Harder
mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
I received a btrfs page allocation failure on my 3.12.7 kernel which
is merged with Chris' for-linus branch for the 3.13_rc kernel.
I have several btrfs partitions mounted, but I believe this error is
on my
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Jan 13, 2014, at 3:58 PM, Holger Brandsmeier brandsme...@gmail.com wrote:
Currently btrfsck failes to repair my partition, I get the output:
[root@ho-think bholger]# btrfsck --repair /dev/sda5
This is almost
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 3:48 AM, Stefan Behrens
sbehr...@giantdisaster.de wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 08:44:55 -0500, Mitch Harder wrote:
I've had a hard time assembling a portable reproducer for this issue.
I discovered that my reproducer was highly dependent on a local
archive of out-of-date
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
On fri, 23 Aug 2013 10:34:42 +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote:
Mitch Harder noticed that the patch 3c64a1a mentioned in the subject
line was causing a kernel BUG() on snapshot deletion.
The patch was wrong. It did not handle
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Nicholas Lee em...@nickle.es wrote:
[ 45.914275] [ cut here ]
[ 45.914406] kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/volumes.c:4417!
[ 45.914489] invalid opcode: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
I can't say if this will fix your problem or not, but the 3.10.x
I'm running into a curious problem.
In the process of making my script portable, I am breaking the ability
to replicate the error.
I'm trying to isolate the aspect of my local script that is triggering
the error. No firm insights yet.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Mitch Harder
mitch.har
Let me work on making that script more portable, and hopefully quicker
to reproduce.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:06:27PM -0500, Mitch Harder wrote:
I'm hitting a btrfs Kernel BUG running a snapshot stress script with
linux
I'm hitting a btrfs Kernel BUG running a snapshot stress script with
linux-3.11.0-rc5.
I'm running with lzo compression, autodefrag, and the partition is
formated with 16k leafsize/inodesize.
[ 72.170431] device fsid 8a6be667-d041-4367-80f7-e4cb42356e85 devid
1 transid 4 /dev/sda7
[
There's been a parallel effort to incorporate a general set of lz4
patches in the kernel.
I see these patches are currently queued up in the linux-next tree, so
we may see them in the 3.11 kernel.
It looks like lz4 and lz4hc will be provided.
So, instead of btrfs having it's own implementation
I'm running into a problem with the btrfs-cleaner thread becoming
blocked on xfstests 068.
The test locks up indefinitely without completing (normally it
finished in about 45 seconds on my test box).
I've replicated the issue on 3.10.0_rc5 and the for-linus branch of 3.9.0.
I ran a git bisect
We had a discussion on this topic in another thread.
I'd be happy to be corrected, but I think the conclusion was that you
probably need to be on a really modern version of Linux to work with
the latest version of btrfs-progs that is in the kernel git
repository.
The mkfs.btrfs version in the
On 4/3/13, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Mar 29, 2013, at 9:42 AM, Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com
wrote:
mkfs.btrfs -l 8192 with kernel 3.9.0 creates a file system mountable by
3.9.0
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mar 29, 2013, at 12:04 AM, cwillu cwi...@cwillu.com wrote:
commit 1a72afaa btrfs-progs: mkfs support for extended inode refs
unconditionally enables extended irefs (which permits more than 4k
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
Is my feeling of slower boot wrong, or is zlib also noticeably slower than
lzo to read and decompress?
Lzo compression should be faster in every aspect than zlib, especially
for reading.
But having said that, btrfs won't
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 04:12:27PM -0500, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
Is my feeling of slower boot wrong, or is zlib also noticeably slower than
lzo to read
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Ask Bjørn Hansen a...@develooper.com wrote:
Hello,
A few weeks ago I replaced a ZFS backup system with one backed by btrfs. A
script loops over a bunch of hosts rsyncing them to each their own subvolume.
After each rsync I snapshot the host-specific
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Avi Miller avi.mil...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
On 22/03/2013, at 8:11 AM, Joseph Moore jap...@gmail.com wrote:
[root@ol6 btrfs-progs]# uname -a
Linux ol6.localdomain 2.6.39-400.17.2.el6uek.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Mar 13
12:31:05 PDT 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Swâmi Petaramesh sw...@petaramesh.org wrote:
Le 07/03/2013 19:06, Jérôme Poulin a écrit :
mkfs.btrfs tries to lookup loop devices by their filenames and fails
if any loop device file is missing.
Hmm Why would mkfs.btrfs want to lookup anything else but the
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@fusionio.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 02:48:22AM -0700, Miao Xie wrote:
When running the 083th case of xfstests on the filesystem with
compress-force=lzo, the following WARNINGs were triggered.
WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:7908
that we can
add snap/subvol into dead roots list in time.
Reported-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
---
fs/btrfs/inode.c |3 ++-
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c |6 ++
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs
I'm getting a series of kernel WARNING messages when testing Josef's
btrfs-next and Chris' next branch running xfstests 083 when mounted
with compress-force=lzo.
I'm not seeing any other indications of problems other than the
WARNINGs on xfstests 083, so this may be some sort of false positive.
I've encountered an issue where the space from previously deleted
snapshots is not being freed up by the cleaner thread.
I'm only encountering this issue when I mount with the inode_cache option.
I've reproduced this on a 3.7.9 kernel merged with the latest
for-linus branch. No additional
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 8:53 AM, David Sterba dste...@suse.cz wrote:
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 11:17:46PM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 6:28 PM, David Sterba d...@jikos.cz wrote:
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 03:38:34PM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
--- a/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
in place to ease the RAM required when spreading compression
across several CPUs, and to make sure the amount of IO required
to do a random read is reasonably small.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
Changelog v1 - v2:
- Use more self-documenting variable name
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 6:28 PM, David Sterba d...@jikos.cz wrote:
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 03:38:34PM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
--- a/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ struct tree_block {
unsigned int key_ready:1;
};
-#define MAX_EXTENTS 128
Provide for modification of the limit of compressed extent size
utilizing mount-time configuration settings.
The size of compressed extents was limited to 128K, which
leads to fragmentation of the extents (although the extents
themselves may still be located contiguously). This limit is
put in
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Zach Brown z...@redhat.com wrote:
+ unsigned compressed_extent_size;
It kind of jumps out that this mentions neither that it's the max nor
that it's in KB. How about max_compressed_extent_kb?
+ fs_info-compressed_extent_size = 128;
I'd put a
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Chris Mason chris.ma...@fusionio.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 08:22:10PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
While running snapshot testscript created by Mitch and David,
the race between autodefrag and snapshot deletion can lead to
corruption of dead_root list so that
to wait for the rcu grace period before adding something
to the global dead_roots list.
Reported-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
I'm still seeing seeing issues with duplications in the dead_roots list.
I'm using a 3.7.4 kernel merged
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Mitch,
Many thanks for testing it!
Well, after some debugging, I finally figure out the whys:
(1) btrfs_ioctl_snap_destroy() will free the inode of snapshot and set
root's refs to zero(btrfs_set_root_refs()), if this
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:05:04AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:41:19AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:42 AM
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 08:55:58AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:05:04AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:51 AM
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:41:19AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Mitch Harder
mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
This comes
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Mitch Harder
mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
This comes from one of btrfs's project ideas,
As we defragment files, we break any sharing from other snapshots.
The balancing code
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 08:42:46AM -0600, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
This comes from one of btrfs's project ideas,
As we defragment files, we break any sharing
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 10:48:50PM -0800, David Brown wrote:
Why not make a snapshot of the root volume, and then delete the files
you want to move from the original root, and delete the rest of root
from the snapshot?
Are
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Chris Carlin chrisrcar...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a week-old filesystem that is reported clean by btrfsck and
scrub, but that fails under operations ranging from du to sync and
umount (but no failures if mounted readonly).
My problem sounds similar to a few
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Hendrik Friedel hend...@friedels.name wrote:
Hello,
I re-send this message, hoping that someone can give me a hint?
Regards,
Hendrik
Two possibilities come to mind (although there may be others).
(1) The file still exists, but it is somewhere you did not
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 3:33 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
We forgot to reset the path lock state to zero after we unlock the path block,
and this can lead to the ASSERT checker in tree unlock API.
Reported-by: Slava Barinov raysl...@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo
I've been testing Josef's btrfs-next master branch using a test that
loops through creation, manipulation and destruction of snapshots of
kernel git sources.
The version of btrfs-next I'm using was built as of Friday, December
14th, and the top commit is:
Btrfs: don't take inode delalloc mutex if
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Hendrik Friedel hend...@friedels.name wrote:
Hello Mitch, hello all,
Since btrfs has significant improvements and fixes in each kernel
release, and since very few of these changes are backported, it is
recommended to use the latest kernels available.
Ok,
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:12 AM, merc1...@f-m.fm wrote:
So there is no way to have filesystem encryption, while keeping
snapshots?
I run btrfs on top of LUKS encryption on my laptop. You should be
able to do the same.
You could then run rsync through ssh. However, rsync will have no
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 08:08:52PM +0900, Itaru Kitayama wrote:
Hi Liubo,
I couldn't apply your V4 patch against the btrfs-next HEAD. Do you have
a github branch which I can checkout?
The current btrfs-next HEAD actually
On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Hendrik Friedel hend...@friedels.name wrote:
Dear Mich,
thanks for your help and suggestion:
It might be interesting for you to try a newer kernel, and use scrub
on this volume if you have the two disks RAIDed.
I have now scrubbed the Disk:
./btrfs scrub
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Hendrik Friedel hend...@friedels.name wrote:
Dear all,
thanks for developing btrfsck!
Now, I'd like to contribute -as far as I can. I'm not a developer, but I do
have some linux-experience.
I've been using btrfsck on two 3TB HDDs (mirrored) for a while now
One of my Btrfs partitions ran into a severe slowdown recently.
Operations that would normally complete in 20-30 seconds were now
requiring hours.
There were no errors or warnings in dmesg (Alt-SysRq-W is below, but
shows nothing out of the ordinary). And if I took the partition
offline, it
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 6:04 AM, ching lschin...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I am testing my btrfs root partition with max_inline=0, and 64k leaf size
for weeks and it seems that it is fine.
AFAIK btrfs inline small files into metadata by default, I am curious why?
If there is only a few
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On 10/30/2012 04:06 AM, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
This comes from one of btrfs's project ideas,
As we defragment files, we break any sharing from other snapshots
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
This comes from one of btrfs's project ideas,
As we defragment files, we break any sharing from other snapshots.
The balancing code will preserve the sharing, and defrag needs to grow this
as well.
Now we're able to fill the
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 1:28 AM, Roman Mamedov r...@romanrm.ru wrote:
Hello,
On a 3.6.0-rc7 kernel, I launched:
# btrfs fi balance start -f -mconvert=single /mnt/tmp/
Current situation:
# df -h /mnt/tmp/
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/alpha-lv1
I've run across two issues with the delayed cleaner process running a
kernel based on the 3.6.0 btrfs-next branch in Josef's git repository.
(1) I'm getting an error when trying to list my subvolumes whenever
the cleaner thread is running:
# btrfs su li /mnt/benchmark/
ERROR: Failed to lookup
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
On 10/03/2012 10:02 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 07:07:53PM -0600, Liu Bo wrote:
On 09/26/2012 01:39 AM, Mitch Harder wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
This comes from
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Øystein Sættem Middelthun
oyst...@middelthun.no wrote:
Hi!
I have a broken btrfs unable to mount because it is unable to find the tree
root. Using find-root I find the following:
Well block 14102764707840 seems great, but generation doesn't match,
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Øystein Sættem Middelthun
oyst...@middelthun.no wrote:
On 10/03/2012 07:29 PM, Mitch Harder wrote:
If you do not have a suitable backup for these files, please make an
effort to do what you can with restore. Some of the repair methods
out there have
Remove a comment that was orphaned by a previous commit which
removed the function associated with the comment.
See commit efd049fb26a162c3830fd3cb1001fdc09b147f3b
This left the comment in a confusing context that seemed to be
associated with another function.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
This comes from one of btrfs's project ideas,
As we defragment files, we break any sharing from other snapshots.
The balancing code will preserve the sharing, and defrag needs to grow this
as well.
Now we're able to fill the
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote:
Hello,
I'm going to look at fixing some of the performance issues that crop up
because
of our reservation system. Before I go and do a whole lot of work I want some
feedback.
When I was trying to figure out the
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 6:46 AM, David Sterba d...@jikos.cz wrote:
...
Fsck spits lots of errors:
ref mismatch on [1133031424 4096] extent item 1, found 0
Backref 1133031424 root 5 not referenced back 0x7d1f40
Incorrect global backref count on 1133031424 found 1 wanted 0
backpointer mismatch
; \
221 __wait_event(wq, condition);\
222 } while (0)
Tested-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
I've been trying out different leafsize/nodesize settings by
benchmarking some typical operations.
These changes had more impact than I expected. Using a
leafsize/nodesize of either 8192 or 16384 provided a noticeable
improvement in my limited testing.
These results are similar to some that
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Mitch Harder
mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
I've been working on running down intermittent ENOSPC issues.
I can only seem to replicate ENOSPC errors when running zlib
compression. However, I have been seeing similar ENOSPC errors to a
lesser extent when
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:20 AM, Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 09:20:00PM -0700, james northrup wrote:
dunno if this thread is dead, but im inclined to patch in cp --reflink
to fdupes prog. It currently does provide a poor-man's dedupe via
md5sum and hardlink,
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 11:55:06AM -0700, james northrup wrote:
looks like ARM results are inconclusive from a lot of folks without
bandwidth to do a write-up, what about just plain STAGING status for ARM so
the android
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote:
Swinging this pendulum back the other way. We've been allocating chunks up
to 2% of the disk no matter how much we actually have allocated. So instead
fix this calculation to only allocate chunks if we have more than 80%
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 01:49:06PM -0600, Arne Jansen wrote:
run_clustered_refs runs all delayed refs for one head one by one. During
the runs, the delayed_refs-lock is released. In this window, the ref_mod
from the head
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Arne Jansen sensi...@gmx.net wrote:
Commit a168650c introduced a waiting mechanism to prevent busy waiting in
btrfs_run_delayed_refs. This can deadlock with btrfs_run_ordered_operations,
where a tree_mod_seq is held while waiting for the io to complete, while
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote:
We need an smb_mb() before waitqueue_active to avoid missing wakeups.
Before Mitch was hitting a deadlock between the ordered flushers and the
transaction commit because the ordered flushers were waiting for more refs
and
I've been working on running down intermittent ENOSPC issues.
I can only seem to replicate ENOSPC errors when running zlib
compression. However, I have been seeing similar ENOSPC errors to a
lesser extent when playing with the LZ4HC patches.
I apologize for not following up on this sooner, but
in with
other send/receive fixes.
Mitch Harder (1):
Btrfs: Explicitly include vmalloc.h in send.c
fs/btrfs/send.c |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
--
1.7.8.6
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body of a message to majord
Certain architectures or platforms or combinations of CONFIG options
require an explicit #include linux/vmalloc.h.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
fs/btrfs/send.c |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/send.c b/fs/btrfs
compression and when setting the default subvolume.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
v1-v2
- Remove extraneous formatting change.
v2-v3
- Consolidate into a single patch
- Convert helper function to a static inline function.
v3-v4
- Per feedback from Li Zefan, change function
to specify compress method when defrag)
in ioctl.c.
The second patch uses the new function in the above referenced
existing check for lzo INCOMPAT performed when defragmenting
with explicit lzo compression. This patch provides no
functional changes.
Mitch Harder (2):
Btrfs: Check INCOMPAT flags
In support of the recently added capability to remount with lzo
compression, check the compression INCOMPAT flags when remounting
with lzo compression, and set the flags if necessary.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h |1 +
fs/btrfs/super.c | 21
When defragmenting with explicit lzo compression, simplify
the check for lzo INCOMPAT by using the new common function
introduced to support remounting with lzo compression.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c |7 +--
1 files changed, 1
In support of the recently added capability to remount with lzo
compression, check the compression INCOMPAT flags when remounting
with lzo compression, and set the flags if necessary.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
v1-v2:
- Remove extraneous formatting change.
fs
When defragmenting with explicit lzo compression, simplify
the check for lzo INCOMPAT by using the new common function
introduced to support remounting with lzo compression.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c |7 +--
1 files changed, 1
to specify compress method when defrag)
in ioctl.c.
Based on feedback on IRC, the two patch version presented in the
previous version has been consolidated into a single patch, and
the helper function was converted to a static inline function.
Mitch Harder (1):
Btrfs: Check INCOMPAT flags on remount
compression.
Signed-off-by: Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org
---
v1-v2
- Remove extraneous formatting change.
v2-v3
- Consolidate into a single patch
- Convert helper function to a static inline function.
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 13 +
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c |7 +--
fs/btrfs/super.c
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 8:28 PM, David Sterba d...@jikos.cz wrote:
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 10:19:14AM -0500, Mitch Harder wrote:
I was testing the lz4(hc) patches, and I found the the compression
INCOMPAT flags are not being updated using the method in this patch.
The compression INCOMPAT
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:40 AM, David Sterba d...@jikos.cz wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 08:48:37AM +0200, Arnd Hannemann wrote:
How show should we proceed to get above mentioned patch
(or the similar patch from Andrei Popa) merged?
Josef picked the patch into btrfs-next, I see not problem
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 3:04 AM, rupert THURNER
rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 7:19 AM, Andrei Popa ierd...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 2012-06-17 at 06:14 +0200, rupert THURNER wrote:
Will result in anything reported in 'dmesg' output?
[ 6431.514454] device label
1 - 100 of 216 matches
Mail list logo
