On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 03:09:35PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 08:06:30AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 05:55:32PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 01:21:09PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
I've just had the following on my home
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Hugo Mills hugo-l...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 06:31:45AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 03:09:35PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 08:06:30AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:58:12PM +0800, Yan, Zheng wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Hugo Mills hugo-l...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 06:31:45AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 03:09:35PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Hugo Mills hugo-l...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:58:12PM +0800, Yan, Zheng wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Hugo Mills hugo-l...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 06:31:45AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Oct 12,
On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 08:06:30AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 05:55:32PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 01:21:09PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
I've just had the following on my home server. I believe that it's
btrfs that's responsible, as the
On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 05:55:32PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 01:21:09PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
I've just had the following on my home server. I believe that it's
btrfs that's responsible, as the machine wasn't doing much other than
reading/writing on a btrfs
On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 01:21:09PM +0100, Hugo Mills wrote:
I've just had the following on my home server. I believe that it's
btrfs that's responsible, as the machine wasn't doing much other than
reading/writing on a btrfs filesystem. The process that was doing so
is now stuck in D+ state,
