Jérôme Poulin posted on Sun, 14 Feb 2016 23:52:18 -0500 as excerpted:
> I have encountered a weird out of memory problem using BTRFS,
> snapshots and duperemove.
> The workload is described as:
> - Lots of static (400G/1T) data which was deduplicated using duperemove
> which saved about 50GB.
> -
There are some BUG_ON()'s after kmalloc() as follows.
=
foo = kmalloc();
BUG_ON(!foo); /* -ENOMEM case */
=
A Docker + memory cgroup user hit these BUG_ON()s.
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112101
Since it's very hard to handle these ENOMEMs properly,
preventing these
Hello everyone,
I have encountered a weird out of memory problem using BTRFS,
snapshots and duperemove.
The workload is described as:
- Lots of static (400G/1T) data which was deduplicated using
duperemove which saved about 50GB.
- Backups are saved to the BTRFS every 2 days, backup take about 2
Hi, David Sterba
Thanks for notice me, sorry for reply late.
> From: David Sterba [mailto:dste...@suse.cz]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 6:14 PM
> To: Zhao Lei
> Cc: 'Chris Mason' ; 'btrfs'
> Subject: Re: [GIT PULL]
Feb 14 18:30:21 specialbrew kernel: [27576201.178630] BTRFS: bdev /dev/sdh
errs: wr 128, rd 8, flush 2, corrupt 0, gen 0
Feb 14 18:30:21 specialbrew kernel: [27576201.309583] BTRFS: lost page write
due to I/O error on /dev/sdh
Feb 14 18:30:21 specialbrew kernel: [27576201.315761] BTRFS: bdev
Marc MERLIN wrote on 2016/02/14 09:26 -0800:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 09:26:28AM -0800, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 08:33:11AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
There is still a last chance.
If btrfsck still report original error about "bad file extent" in root:
45851/45852/...
Hi Chris,
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 04:49:29PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Andy Smith wrote:
> > $ sudo btrfs dev remove /dev/sdh /srv/tank
> > ERROR: not a block device: /dev/sdh
>
>
> Since now it's a missing device, it should be
>
> sudo
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Andy Smith wrote:
>
> So, ideally I'd like to remove the missing device sdh (id 2) to have
> redundant copies of the data until I can insert a new drive. But
> "remove" doesn't seem to want to work:
>
> $ sudo btrfs dev remove /dev/sdh
Use all defaults for everything. Anything new by show should do the
right thing including 4096 byte alignment.
gargamel:~# cryptsetup luksDump /dev/md8
[snip]
Payload offset: 3072
This is a bit weird because the default is 4096. But because the LUKS
offset (header + payload + extra unused space)
Hi,
I'm using this Ruby script to maintain my BTRFS filesystems and try to
avoid them getting in a position where they can't allocate space even
though there is still plenty of it.
http://pastebin.com/39567Dun
It seems to work well (it maintains dozens of BTRFS filesystems, running
balance on
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 01:43:05PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Use all defaults for everything. Anything new by show should do the
> right thing including 4096 byte alignment.
>
> gargamel:~# cryptsetup luksDump /dev/md8
> [snip]
> Payload offset: 3072
>
> This is a bit weird because the
Hi Mike,
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 12:23:16AM +0500, Михаил Гаврилов wrote:
> Sorry, I have not yet had time to apply your patch.
>
> And get hang again when launch web browser.
>
> Here new logs: http://btrfs.sy24.ru/kernel-sysrqw-btrfscleaner770blocked-3.txt
The logs show,
every hung process is
On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 13:32:24 -0800
Liu Bo wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 12:23:16AM +0500, Михаил Гаврилов wrote:
> > Sorry, I have not yet had time to apply your patch.
> >
> > And get hang again when launch web browser.
> >
> > Here new logs:
> >
Hi,
One of my drives died earlier in a fairly emphatic way in that not
only did it show IO errors and got removed as a device by the
kernel, but it was also making audible grinding/screeching noises
until I hot unplugged it.
Feb 14 18:29:36 specialbrew kernel: [27576156.070961] ata6.15: SATA
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 09:26:28AM -0800, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 08:33:11AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > There is still a last chance.
> >
> > If btrfsck still report original error about "bad file extent" in root:
> > 45851/45852/...
> > Btrfs-debug-tree may provide useful
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 12:28:13PM +, Duncan wrote:
> Marc MERLIN posted on Fri, 12 Feb 2016 19:28:46 -0800 as excerpted:
>
> > btrfs send lets you keep COW blocks within a subvolume.
> > But if I have lots of backups where subvolumes have shared data, and I
> > need to migrate this to a new
>> > Do you think there is still a chance to recover those files?
>>
>> You can use btrfs restore to get files off a damaged fs.
>
> This however does work - thank you!
> Now since I'm a bit short on disc space, can I remove the disc that
> previously disappeared (and thus doesn't have all the
>
Henk Slager gmail.com> writes:
> You could use 1-time mount option clear_cache, then mount normally and
> cache will be rebuild automatically (but also corrected if you don't
> clear it)
This didn't help, gave me
[ 316.111596] BTRFS info (device sda): force clearing of disk cache
[
18 matches
Mail list logo