Hi, all. I was resizing (shrinking) a btrfs partition, and figured I'd
check in on how it was going with "btrfs fi usage." It was quite
startling:
$ sudo btrfs fi usage /mnt/
Overall:
Device size: 370.00GiB
Device allocated:372.03GiB
Device unallocated:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:25:32PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> On Sun, 2016-08-28 at 22:19 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > Transports over which you're likely to send a filesystem stream
> > already
> > protect against corruption.
> Well... in some cases,... but not always... just cons
Hi, all. I've been playing around with an old laptop of mine, and I
figured I'd use it as a learning / bugfinding opportunity. Its /home
partition was originally ext3. I have a full partition image of this
drive as a backup, so I can do (and have done) potentially destructive
things. The system dis
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 02:23:44PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Not a mess, I think it's a good bug report. I think Qu and David know
> more about the latest iteration of the convert code. If you can wait
> until next week at least to see if they have questions that'd be best.
> If you need to get
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 05:45:59PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Sean Greenslade
> wrote:
>
> > In the mean time, is there any way to make the kernel more verbose about
> > btrfs errors? It would be nice to see, for example, what was in the
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 07:27:58PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
> Interesting, seems that we get errors from
>
> btrfs_finish_ordered_io
> insert_reserved_file_extent
> __btrfs_drop_extents
>
> And splitting an inline extent throws -95.
Heh, you beat me to the draw. I was just coming to the same
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:20:37AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
> -95 is -EOPNOTSUPP.
>
> Not a common errno in btrfs.
>
> Most EOPNOTSUPP are related to discard and crapped fallcate/drop extents.
>
> Then are you using discard mount option?
I did indeed have the discard mount option enabled. I t
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 02:30:28PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> All chunks are completed convert to DUP, no small chunk, all to its maximum
> chunk size.
> So from chunk level, nothing related to convert yet.
>
> But for extent tree, I found several extents are heavily referred to.
> Like extent 1581
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:08:55AM -0400, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
>
> At the end of the day I'm not sure fsck really matters. If the filesystem
> is getting corrupted enough that both copies of metadata are broken,
> there's something fundamentally wrong with that setup (hardware bugs,
> software bug
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:49:42AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> OK, I see the problem now.
>
> The new convert is designed to create minimal number of extents, so it
> result the following file extents layout:
>
> Ext2_save/image
> |
> /---\
> | Extent A
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 01:02:38PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > Glad to hear you've found the core of the issue.
> >
> > At this point, I can trigger it immediately. As soon as I log in and run
> > dmenu, it will attempt to rebuild its cache file (small text file that's
> > just a list of all execu
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 04:51:21PM -0400, Sean Greenslade wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 01:02:38PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > > Glad to hear you've found the core of the issue.
> > >
> > > At this point, I can trigger it immediately. As soon as I log in and
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 10:15:11PM +0200, Ruben Salzgeber wrote:
> Hi everyone
>
> I'm reaching out to you because I experience unusually slow read and
> write speeds on my Arch Linux server in combination with OS X time
> machine. My setup is consists of an Core i3 6300, 16GB Ram, 128GB SSD
> for
Hi, all. I have a question about a backup plan I have involving
send/receive. As far as I can tell, there's no way to to resume a send
that has been interrupted. In this case, my interruption comes from an
overbearing firewall that doesn't like long-lived connections. I'm
trying to do the initial (
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 01:14:51AM +0200, Hans van Kranenburg wrote:
> On 10/13/2016 12:29 AM, Sean Greenslade wrote:
> > Hi, all. I have a question about a backup plan I have involving
> > send/receive. As far as I can tell, there's no way to to resume a send
> > tha
On October 14, 2016 12:43:03 AM EDT, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>I see the specific questions have been answered, and alternatives
>explored in one direction, but I've another alternative, in a different
>
>direction, to suggest.
>
>First a disclaimer. I'm a btrfs user/sysadmin and regu
On August 28, 2019 5:51:02 PM PDT, Marc Oggier wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I am currently buidling a small data server for an experiment.
>
>I was wondering if the features of the spare volume introduced a couple
>
>of years ago (ttps://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8687721/) would be
>release soon. I think
On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 07:21:14PM -0700, Sean Greenslade wrote:
> On August 28, 2019 5:51:02 PM PDT, Marc Oggier
> wrote:
> >Hi All,
> >
> >I am currently buidling a small data server for an experiment.
> >
> >I was wondering if the features of the spare
On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 11:03:59AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> 01.09.2019 6:28, Sean Greenslade пишет:
> >
> > I decided to do a bit of experimentation to test this theory. The
> > primary goal was to see if a filesystem could suffer a failed disk and
> >
Hello, all. I'm currently tracking down the source of some strange
behavior in my setup. I recognize that this isn't strictly a btrfs
issue, but I figured I'd start at the bottom of the stack and work my
way up.
I have a server with a btrfs filesystem on it that I remotely access on
several system
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:23:40AM -0400, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> On 2017-03-23 06:09, Hugo Mills wrote:
> >Direct rename (using rename(2)) isn't possible across subvols,
> > which is what the EXDEV result indicates. The solution is exactly what
> > mv does, which is reflink-and-delete (w
On Sat, Apr 01, 2017 at 11:48:50AM +0200, Kai Herlemann wrote:
> Hi,
> I have on my ext4 filesystem some sparse files, mostly images from
> ext4 filesystems.
> Is btrfs-convert (4.9.1) able to deal with sparse files or can that
> cause any problems?
>From personal experience, I would recommend not
On May 3, 2017 4:28:11 PM EDT, Alexandru Guzu wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>In a VirtualBox VM, I converted a EXT4 fs to BTRFS that is now running
>on Ubuntu 16.04 (Kernel 4.4.0-72). I was able to use the system for
>several weeks. I even did kernel updates, compression, deduplication
>without issues.
>
>Sin
On May 8, 2017 11:28:42 AM EDT, Sanidhya Solanki wrote:
>On Mon, 8 May 2017 10:16:44 -0400
>Alexandru Guzu wrote:
>
>> Sean, how would you approach the copy of the data back and forth if
>> the OS is on it? Would a Send-receive and then back work?
>
>You could use a Live-USB and then just dd it
On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 12:41:11PM -0400, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> Send/receive is not likely to transfer the problem unless it has something
> to do with how things are reflinked. Receive operates by recreating the
> sent subvolume from userspace using regular commands and the clone ioctls,
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 05:24:31PM +0100, Psalle wrote:
> Hello all and excuse me if this is a silly question. I looked around in the
> wiki and list archives but couldn't find any in-depth discussion about this:
>
> I just realized that, since raid1 in btrfs is special (meaning only two
> copies
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 01:47:36PM -0500, Sean Greenslade wrote:
> OK, I just misunderstood how that syntax worked. All seems good now.
> I'll try to play around with some dummy configurations this weekend to
> see if I can reproduce the post-replace mount bug.
So I finally got som
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 07:56:08PM +0200, Gert Menke wrote:
> MD+LVM is very close to what I want, but md has no way to cope with silent
> data corruption. So if I'd want to use a guest filesystem that has no
> checksums either, I'm out of luck.
> I'm honestly a bit confused here - isn't checksummi
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:30:57AM -0600, Jim Murphy wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> What am I missing or misunderstanding? I have a newly
> purchased laptop I want/need to multi boot different OSs
> on. As a result after partitioning I have ended up with two
> partitions on each of the two internal drives
On September 19, 2017 11:38:13 PM PDT, Dave wrote:
>>On Thu 2017-08-31 (09:05), Ulli Horlacher wrote:
>
>Here's my scenario. Some months ago I built an over-the-top powerful
>desktop computer / workstation and I was looking forward to really
>fantastic performance improvements over my 6 year old
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 05:47:54PM -0400, Dave wrote:
> I'm following up on all the suggestions regarding Firefox performance
> on BTRFS.
>
>
>
> 5. Firefox profile sync has not worked well for us in the past, so we
> don't use it.
> 6. Our machines generally have plenty of RAM so we could put th
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 04:45:09PM -0700, Anand Patil wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> When I run btrfs fi df /path/to/fs, I see:
>
> Data, single: total=53.01GiB, used=51.79GiB
> System, DUP: total=32.00MiB, used=16.00KiB
> Metadata, DUP: total=16.00GiB, used=14.72GiB
>
> My most pressing question is,
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 08:43:25PM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> May be that I am missing something obvious, however I have to ask which
> would be the purpose to balance a two disks RAID1 system.
> The balance command should move the data between the disks in order to
> avoid some disk full
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:28:56AM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> The WD datasheet says something different. It reports "Non-recoverable
> read errors per bits read" less than 1/10^14. They express the number of
> error in terms of number of bit reading.
>
> You instead are saying that the
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:51:19PM -0400, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
> This is a complex topic.
I agree, and I make no claim to be an expert in any of this.
> Some disks have bugs in their firmware, and some of those bugs make the
> data sheets and most of this discussion entirely moot. The firmware i
35 matches
Mail list logo
