Hello,
I'm running a laptop, macbook pro 8,2, with ubuntu, on kernel
3.13.0-49-lowlatency. I have a USB enclosure containing two harddrives
(Icydock JBOD). Each harddrive runs their own btrfs file system, on top of
luks partitions. I backup one harddrive to the other using btrfs
send/receive with
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 06:48:43PM +, Miguel Negrão wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm running a laptop, macbook pro 8,2, with ubuntu, on kernel
> 3.13.0-49-lowlatency. I have a USB enclosure containing two harddrives
Btrfs send/receive is not known to work well enough until 3.14.x, and
several corrupti
Marc MERLIN merlins.org> writes:
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 06:48:43PM +, Miguel Negrão wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm running a laptop, macbook pro 8,2, with ubuntu, on kernel
> > 3.13.0-49-lowlatency. I have a USB enclosure containing two harddrives
>
> Btrfs send/receive is not known to
The inode is already found, use the data and make restore friendlier.
Signed-off-by: Dan Merillat
---
cmds-restore.c | 12
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
diff --git a/cmds-restore.c b/cmds-restore.c
index d2fc951..95ac487 100644
--- a/cmds-restore.c
+++ b/cmds-restore.c
@@ -567,1
I think thunderbird ate that patch, sorry.
I didn't make it conditional - there's really no reason to not restore
the information. I was actually surprised that it didn't restore
before this patch.
If it looks good I'll resend without the word-wrapping.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
Dan Merillat posted on Thu, 16 Apr 2015 19:33:46 -0400 as excerpted:
> The inode is already found, use the data and make restore friendlier.
Unless things have changed recently, restore doesn't even restore user/
group ownership, let alone permissions. IOW, atime/mtime are the least
of the prob
That's not a bad idea. In my case it was all owned by the same user
(media storage) so the only thing of interest was the timestamps.
I can whip up a patch to do that as well.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Dan Merillat posted on Thu, 16 Apr 2015 19:33:46
On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 22:19:46 -0400
Dan Merillat wrote:
[Reordered to standard list quote/reply-in-context order.]
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> > Dan Merillat posted on Thu, 16 Apr 2015 19:33:46 -0400 as excerpted:
> >
> >> The inode is already found,
Hi,
I have below queries. Could somebody help me in understanding.
1)
As per my understanding btrfs file system uses one chunk tree and one
extent tree for entire btrfs disk allocation.
Is this correct?
In, some article i read that future there will be more chunk tree/ extent
tree for single b
