I got m laptop to hang all IO to one of its devices again, this time
drive #2.
This is the 3rd time it happens, and I've already lost data as a result
since things that haven't hit disk, don't make it at this point.
I was doing balance and btrfs send/receive.
Then cron started a scrub in the
Marc MERLIN posted on Wed, 21 May 2014 20:19:06 -0700 as excerpted:
If you're new with Btrfs, this may be a useful walkthrough for you.
You can go through the slides which I wrote to be readable without the
video, but the video is available too if you'd like:
Tomasz Chmielewski posted on Thu, 22 May 2014 03:22:58 +0100 as excerpted:
One disk in RAID-1 crashed, so powered off, changed disk, powered on,
trying to mount degraded.
Unfortunately it hangs (running 3.14.4).
# mount -o degraded,compress=lzo,noatime /dev/sdb4 /home (...never
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
I have an opinion that system logs /var/log/messages are
valuable info to investigate the real system issues at
the data center. People handling data center issues
do spend a lot time and efforts analyzing messages
files. Having usage error logged into
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
generally if you use
echo test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
it would introduce return char at the end and it can not
be part of the label. The correct command is
echo -n test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
This patch will check for this user error
On 21/05/14 00:33, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 02:36:48PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
generally if you use
echo test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
it would introduce return char at the end and it can not
be part of the label. The correct
On 2014-05-21 19:05, Martin wrote:
Very good comment from Ashford.
Sorry, but I see no advantages from Russell's replies other than for a
feel-good factor or a dangerous false sense of security. At best,
there is a weak justification that for metadata, again going from 2% to
4% isn't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anand Jain schreef op 22-05-14 12:41:
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
I have an opinion that system logs /var/log/messages are valuable info to
investigate the real system issues at the data center. People handling
data center issues do
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 06:41:11PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
@@ -385,7 +392,8 @@ static ssize_t btrfs_label_store(struct kobject *kobj,
return PTR_ERR(trans);
spin_lock(root-fs_info-super_lock);
- strcpy(fs_info-super_copy-label, buf);
+
On 05/21/2014 09:21 PM, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
On 05/21/2014 08:12 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
The Btrfs sysfs code removes entries for raid types that are no
longer in use. This means that if you have a raid0 FS and use balance
to turn it into a raid1 FS, the raid0 sysfs entries will go away.
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:09:21AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
I got m laptop to hang all IO to one of its devices again, this time
drive #2.
This is the 3rd time it happens, and I've already lost data as a result
since things that haven't hit disk, don't make it at this point.
I was doing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 5/22/14, 8:19 AM, Chris Mason wrote:
Can we safely reinit a kobject that has been put in use in sysfs?
Given all the things that can hold refs etc is this legal?
It depends on how the kobject is being used.
It wouldn't be safe to re-use the
One disk in RAID-1 crashed, so powered off, changed disk, powered
on, trying to mount degraded.
Unfortunately it hangs (running 3.14.4).
# mount -o degraded,compress=lzo,noatime /dev/sdb4 /home (...never
returns...)
1) Just to be sure, btrfs raid1, not btrfs on md/raid1 or the
I thought an important idea behind btrfs was that we avoid by design
in the first place the very long and vulnerable RAID rebuild scenarios
suffered for block-level RAID...
This may be true for SSD disks - for ordinary disks it's not entirely
the case.
For most RAID rebuilds, it still seems
On May 22, 2014, at 3:43 AM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Note that unlike md/raid1, btrfs raid1 won't mount writable with only a
single device. You must have at least two devices to mount writable, tho
a formerly two-device raid1 with a device missing should mount read-only.
No, a
On 05/22/2014 11:05 AM, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
- gpg control packet
On 5/22/14, 8:19 AM, Chris Mason wrote:
Can we safely reinit a kobject that has been put in use in sysfs?
Given all the things that can hold refs etc is this legal?
It depends on how the kobject is being used.
It wouldn't
Try -o recovery,degraded
I would drop the other options for now, since they aren't necessary
to recover from a \ device failure.
Yes I've tried that as well, and it ends in the similar hang - high
IO for a while, then no IO at all, mount does not return.
It *does* mount as ro,degraded, but
On May 22, 2014, at 11:50 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski t...@virtall.com wrote:
Try -o recovery,degraded
I would drop the other options for now, since they aren't necessary
to recover from a \ device failure.
Yes I've tried that as well, and it ends in the similar hang - high
IO for a while,
There is otherwise a risk of a possible null pointer dereference.
Was largely found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.
Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist rickard_strandqv...@spectrumdigital.se
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c |5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2
Marc MERLIN posted on Thu, 22 May 2014 06:15:29 -0700 as excerpted:
Balance cancel hangs too and so does sync [...]
For balance, if it comes to having to stop it on new mount after a
shutdown, there is of course the skip_balance mount option.
I was able to stop my btrfs send/receive, in turn
Tomasz Chmielewski posted on Thu, 22 May 2014 18:50:25 +0100 as excerpted:
It *does* mount as ro,degraded, but then, it's not possible to add a
disk and recover to a functioning RAID-1.
Also, when I try to remount rw, the mount command hangs as well.
Is there anything else I can try?
It's
On May 22, 2014, at 11:50 AM, Tomasz Chmielewski t...@virtall.com wrote:
Try -o recovery,degraded
I would drop the other options for now, since they aren't necessary
to recover from a \ device failure.
Yes I've tried that as well, and it ends in the similar hang - high
IO for a while,
Russell,
Overall, there are still a lot of unknowns WRT the stability, and ROI
(Return On Investment) of implementing ditto blocks for BTRFS. The good
news is that there's a lot of time before the underlying structure is in
place to support, so there's time to figure this out a bit better.
On
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 08:52:34PM +, Duncan wrote:
It's been running for at least 15mn in 'cancel mode'. Is that normal?
I'd guess so. It's probably in the middle of operations for a single
chunk, and only checks for cancel between chunks. Given the possible
complexity of those
On 22/05/14 19:21, Koen Kooi wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anand Jain schreef op 22-05-14 12:41:
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
I have an opinion that system logs /var/log/messages are valuable info to
investigate the real system issues at the data center.
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
I have an opinion that system logs under /var/log/ are
valuable info to investigate the real system issues at
the data center. People handling data center issues
do spend a lot time and efforts analyzing messages
files. Having usage error logged into system
From: Anand Jain anand.j...@oracle.com
generally if you use
echo test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
it would introduce return char at the end and it can not
be part of the label. The correct command is
echo -n test /sys/fs/btrfs/fsid/label
This patch will check for this user error
So that the same check (btrfs cloner program presence) can be reused
by other tests.
Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana fdman...@gmail.com
---
common/rc | 7 +++
tests/btrfs/035 | 4 +---
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
index
We were cleaning the clone target file range from the page cache before
we did replace the file extent items in the fs tree. This was racy,
as right after cleaning the relevant range from the page cache and before
replacing the file extent items, a read against that range could be
performed by
This is a test to verify that the btrfs ioctl clone operation is
able to clone extents of a file to different positions of the file,
that is, the source and target files are the same. Existing tests
only cover the case where the source and target files are different.
Signed-off-by: Filipe David
Steps to reproduce:
# mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdb
# mount /dev/sdb /mnt -o compress-force=lzo
# mount /dev/sdb /mnt -o remount,compress=zlib
# cat /proc/mounts
Remounting from compress-force to compress could not clear compress-force
option. The problem is there is no way for users to clear
On Thu, 22 May 2014 15:09:40 ashf...@whisperpc.com wrote:
You've addressed half of the issue. It appears that the metadata is
normally a bit over 1% using the current methods, but two samples do not
make a statistical universe. The good news is that these two samples are
from opposite
32 matches
Mail list logo
