Hi all,
I was under the mistaken impression that btrfs checksumming, in its
current default configuration, protected your data from bitrot. It
appears this is not the case:
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 18:24 +0100, Johannes Hirte wrote:
> Am Mittwoch 06 Januar 2010 16:59:55 schrieb Steve Frei
Hi Johannes,
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 18:24 +0100, Johannes Hirte wrote:
> Am Mittwoch 06 Januar 2010 16:59:55 schrieb Steve Freitas:
> > Thanks for your response. You're correct about the bad sector warning.
> > So please correct me if I have some mistaken assumptions. I though
Hi Sander,
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 08:52 +0100, Sander wrote:
> I don't have your original mail, but I think I remember you mentioned a
> lot of bad sectors on that disk reported by SMART.
>
> If that is indeed the case it might be dificult for the people who might
> be able to help you, to help yo
Should I take it by the lack of list response that I should just flush
this partition down the toilet and start over? Or is everybody either
flummoxed or on vacation?
Steve
On Sun, 2010-01-03 at 16:37 -0800, Steve Freitas wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-01-03 at 14:57 -0800, Steve Freitas wrote:
>
On Sun, 2010-01-03 at 14:57 -0800, Steve Freitas wrote:
> Got some more information. I installed Debian on another disk ("rescue")
> running 2.6.32, pulled the latest btrfs module code from git, applied an
> earlier mentioned patch[1], then compiled and loaded the new module.
&
Got some more information. I installed Debian on another disk ("rescue")
running 2.6.32, pulled the latest btrfs module code from git, applied an
earlier mentioned patch[1], then compiled and loaded the new module.
It's able to mount the volume initially...
Jan 3 14:46:57 rescue kernel: [ 25.98
I've got a Debian unstable system (kernel is 2.6.32-trunk-amd64) with
the root partition running btrfs. Used it for a few weeks with no large
problems, but had to reboot it this morning after it became unresponsive
simultaneous with unexplained constant disk access. It wouldn't reboot
-- it loaded
