On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 08:05:23AM +0200, Björn Wüst wrote:
> Good morning,
>
>
> I currently have a single-disk setup where I want to use btrfs filesystem.
> Yet, I expect to add additional disks to this system in the future. Those
> disks shall be visible to the OS like a single disk, i.e. us
Same thing here.
I've tried really hard, but even after 12 hours I wasn't able to get a
single warning from btrfs.
I think you cracked it!
Thanks,
Christian
2012/5/24 Martin Mailand :
> Hi,
> the ceph cluster is running under heavy load for the last 13 hours without a
> problem, dmesg is empty
Hi Hugo,
Thank you very much for the information.
Regards
Bjoern
-Original Message-
From: Hugo Mills [mailto:h...@carfax.org.uk]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:41 AM
To: Björn Wüst
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Preparing single-disk setup for future multi-disk usage
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:42:19AM +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
> @@ -87,9 +102,9 @@ static void __btrfs_add_inode_defrag(struct inode *inode,
> parent = *p;
> entry = rb_entry(parent, struct inode_defrag, rb_node);
>
> - if (defrag->ino < entry->ino)
> +
On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 08:05 +0200, Björn Wüst wrote:
> Good morning,
>
>
> I currently have a single-disk setup where I want to use btrfs
> filesystem. Yet, I expect to add additional disks to this system in
> the future. Those disks shall be visible to the OS like a single disk,
> i.e. using mul
Two files in the different subvolumes may have the same inode id, so
The rb-tree which is used to manage the defragment object must take it
into account. This patch fix this problem.
Signed-off-by: Miao Xie
---
Changelog v1 -> v2
- cleanup unnecessary comparison.
---
fs/btrfs/file.c | 49 +
Hello,
if a snapshot was created with -r and thus is read only, accessing
files in it will update the atime. I would expect that atime is not
updated on ro snapshots.
I tried to find out where the ro check is missing. The problem seems
to be that the vfs is only checking the mount, super block an
On 05/24/2012 04:15 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> On 05/23/2012 01:21 PM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> On 05/17/2012 02:08 PM, Liu Bo wrote:
>>> This patch fixes two bugs:
>>>
>>> When we do not assigne a device id for the resizer,
>>> - it will only take one device to resize, which is supposed
Hi Chris, Hi Josef,
Hi Btrfs-List and all other Btrfs-devs that I've forgot,
is there a chance we'll see a xz file-compression support in Btrfs
anytime soon ?
I'm sure folks have been waiting for additional compression support
besides gzip and lzo (bzip2 seems out of question due to its slownes
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 07:31:49PM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> Hi Rogerio,
>
> On 05/23/2012 05:00 PM, Rogerio Bastos wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying mount many subvolume during boot via fstab:
> >
> > UUID=xxx /usr btrfs subvol=usr,ro,nodev 0 0
> > UUID=xxx /home btrfs subvol=home,nod
1) This function is not used anywhere.
2) Using the blk_abort_queue() to abort the queue seems not correct.
blk_abort_queue() is used for timeout handling (block/blk-timeout.c).
Cc: Chris Mason
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Jens Axboe
Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Asias
This function is only used by btrfs code in btrfs_abort_devices()
(seems in a wrong way). However, btrfs_abort_devices() is not used
anywhere. Let's remove the dead code to avoid any confusion.
Cc: Jens Axboe
Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Chris Mason
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Signed
12 matches
Mail list logo
