On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 5:29 PM, René Vangsgaard
wrote:
> Thank you for answering.
>
> 2) I get this error when mounting:
> couldn't open because of unsupported option features (8).
> fsck.btrfs: disk-io.c:679: open_ctree_fd: Assertion `!(1)' failed.
You're running an out-of-date version of btrfs
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 7:01 AM, René Vangsgaard
wrote:
> I have decided to update progs from git. The instructions on the wiki
> do not really help me out (for example I cannot checkout branch
> "for-chris"). Can anyone tell me what branch (probably integration) to
> use on kernel 3.0.0? Or just
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 6:33 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 01:24:57AM +0100, Amedee Van Gasse wrote:
>> On 02-06-11 01:20, Hugo Mills wrote:
>> > Unless the traffic gets too high-volume, or unless someone
>> >important objects, I'm going to suggest that bug reports should go t
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 10:42 PM, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 11:21:14 +0700
>> "Fajar A. Nugraha" wrote:
>>
>>> I'm trying fstrim and my disk is now pegged at write IOPS. Just
>>> wondering if maybe a "btrfs fi balance"
> For btrfs bugs are still fixed on a daily basis, and some reports of
> people with corrupted and unrecoverable filesystems.
I don't know that there's been any actual unrecoverable filesystems
recently; unmountable is by far the more common issue, and given that
most sane people aren't putting th
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>
> These are the btrfs-tools versions on Debian:
>
> squeeze:
> kernel: 2.6.32
> tools: 0.19+20100601-3
>
> squeeze-backports:
> kernel: 2.6.39
> tools: nothing (so user ends up with 0.19+20100601-3)
>
> wheezy/testing/sid:
> kernel: 3.1.6-1
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Arie Peterson wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 January 2012 15:06:43 Sander wrote:
>
>> Maybe your snapshots take up space. Can you show 'btrfs filesystem df /' ?
>
> Data, RAID1: total=22.72GB, used=14.73GB
> Data: total=8.00MB, used=0.00
> System, RAID1: total=8.00MB, used=
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Mitch Harder
wrote:
> 2012/1/10 Michal Suba :
>> Hello
>>
>> we are currently investigating performance issue on system runing above
>> btrs filesystem. Is it possible, that performance is impacted by lack of
>> free space? Also, how to get info about real free s
First thing I'd try is to try mounting it readonly ("mount ... -o
ro"). This should get it mounted, or at least failing at a later
point with different (better?) error messages to work from. (dmesg
output after such an attempt would be useful).
On the vanilla kernel front, Ubuntu has kernel debs
> So if I for example edit a text file three times and store it I can get the
> following.
> Version1: I currently like cheese
> Version2: I currently like onions
> Version3: I currently like apples
> As far as I understand a disk corruption might result in me suddenly liking
> onions (or even chee
>> [11138.535482] device fsid 808bddf9-a2c5-4121-814f-ebbf4ec7d50c devid 1
>> transid 11368 /dev/vda1
>> [11276.469967] [ cut here ]
>> [11276.469980] WARNING: at
>> /build/buildd/linux-3.0.0/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:5693
>> use_block_rsv+0xc0/0x170 [btrfs]()
>> [11276.469982]
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Daniel Kuhn wrote:
> After a forced power turn-off the filesystem of my primary boot partition
> cannot be mounted anymore,
> btrfs crashes during the mount process. I'm using OpenSuse 12.1 but I've
> also tried mounting with a newer kernel 3.2.2 (systemrescue cd) a
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:42:32 +0100
> "Norbert Scheibner" wrote:
>
>> So the used space of subvolume I deleted, was not freed.
>
> AFAIK the only reliable way currently to ensure the space after a subvolume
> deletion is freed, is to remount
[740684.492052] usb 1-2: new high-speed USB device number 60 using ehci_hcd
[740684.626091] scsi48 : usb-storage 1-2:1.0
[740685.072051] usb 4-2: new full-speed USB device number 78 using uhci_hcd
[740685.140058] hub 4-0:1.0: unable to enumerate USB device on port 2
[740685.380047] usb 1-4: new hig
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Christian Robert
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I ran a quite heavy script who create 10,000 subvolumes and then delete
> thoses 10,000 subvolumes.
>
> No problems in the "create" part, but at the "delete" part
> I got several traceback from the kernel:
>
[snip]
>
> and finally
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Travis Shivers wrote:
> Where should I grab the source from? The main repo that you have
> listed on your main wiki page
> (https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/articles/b/t/r/Btrfs_source_repositories.html)
> is down:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maso
> I get the following errors when running fileflags on large (>2GB) database
> files:
>
> open(): No such file or directory
>
> open(): Value too large for defined data type
http://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/faq/#Value-too-large-for-defined-data-type
"""The message "Value too large for defin
There's a few things that bother me about this, not least of all the
assumptions it makes about cron,(notably the direct modification of
crontab files, which is considered to be an internal detail if I
understand correctly, and I'm fairly certain is broken as written),
and how it writes to its own
>> Perhaps all that is unnecessary: rather than doing the walk, why not
>> make use of btrfs subvolume find-new (or rather, the syscalls it
>> uses)?
>
> While developing snapper I faced similar problems and looked at
> find-new but unfortunately it is not sufficient. E.g. when a file
> is deleted
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> I seem to have the following subvolumes of my filesystem:
>
> # btrfs sub li /
> ID 256 top level 5 path @
> ID 257 top level 5 path @home
> ID 258 top level 5 path @/etc/apt/oneiric
>
> I *think* the last one is there due to a:
>
> # btrfs
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On 12-03-02 08:36 AM, cwillu wrote:
>>
>> Try btrfs sub delete /etc/apt/oneiric, assuming that that's the path
>> where you actually see it.
>
> Well, there is a root filesystem at /etc/apt/oneiric:
>
&
> ---
> sync; read current tran-id and compare
> (new tgw occurs)
> snapshot
> new tgw occurs
> sync; read current tran-id again and store
> ---
>
> which will result in failing to take snapshot even if there are changes.
"btrfs sub find-new /snapshot- -1" shows the transid of the lat
> Now when I try to mount it with all present kernels (up to 3.2.0) I get
> several
> minutes of disk churning, and a kernel stack trace.
[snip]
> As such, my questions are these:
> 1) What information do you require in order to ascertain the degree of my
> problem?
The stack trace would be a s
> In a nutshell: organize your heterogenous disks into two "halves", the sum of
> which are of roughly equal size, and create a raid1 array across those two
> halves.
>
[snip]
>
> In the long term, I would like this to be something that btrfs could do by
> itself, without LVM. Having absolutely no
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 4:57 AM, Christoph Groth wrote:
> I have a freshly installed system with btrfs as the root file system.
> The machine is running linux 3.2. The raid1 btrfs file system lives on
> two new hard drives.
>
> About one day after installation the following message appeared in
>
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Calvin Walton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a system that's using a dracut-generated initramfs to mount a
> btrfs root. After upgrading to kernel 3.4.0-rc2 to test it out, I've
> noticed that the process of mounting the root filesystem takes much
> longer with 3.4.0-rc2 t
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Liu Bo wrote:
> On 04/12/2012 11:54 PM, Arne Jansen wrote:
>> This patchset reimplements snapshot deletion with the help of the readahead
>> framework. For this callbacks are added to the framework. The main idea is
>> to traverse many snapshots at once at read man
> dmesg and fstab attached as requested.
Need dmesg after you've hit alt-sysrq-w a couple times during the slow period.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/maj
These are usb disks? Does that failure at 12.241517 (or related)
happen every time?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Hugo Mills posted on Fri, 13 Apr 2012 14:16:32 +0100 as excerpted:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 10:56:00PM +, Duncan wrote:
>>> Hugo Mills posted on Thu, 12 Apr 2012 22:55:46 +0100 as excerpted:
>>> > The general advice is
> but I can't get the filesystem show command to output anything useful:
> gandalfthegreat:~# btrfs filesystem show /dev/mapper/cryptroot
> Btrfs Btrfs v0.19
You need to run that as root.
> gandalfthegreat:~#
>
> and the btrfs df ssems to show that I'm ok:
> gandalfthegreat:~# btrfs filesystem df
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 06:03:50PM +0200, Olivier Doucet wrote:
>> hello everyone,
>>
>> I made an overall benchmark of BTRFS against EXT4 and XFS. I'm quite
>> unhappy with BTRFS results, so maybe tuning was not perfect.
>>
>> http://www.slide
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 04:48:48PM +0200, Alexander Koch wrote:
>> So I added the two new disks to my existing filesystem
>>
>> $ btrfs device add /dev/sde1 /dev/sdf1 /mnt/archive
>>
>> and as the capacity reported by 'btrfs filesystem df' di
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Helmut Hullen wrote:
> Hallo, Daniel,
>
> Du meintest am 07.05.12:
>
>>> mkfs.btrfs -m raid1 -d raid0
>>>
>>> with 3 disks gives me a "cluster" which looks like 1 disk/partition/
>>> directory.
>>> If one disk fails nothing is usable.
>
>> How is that different
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:36 AM, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a quite unreliable SSD here which develops some bad blocks from
>> time to time which result in read-errors.
>> Once the block is written to again, its remapped in
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Russell Coker wrote:
> Is it expected that running btrfsck more than once will keep reporting errors?
Without options, btrfsck does not write to the disk.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord.
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Mar 2013, cwillu wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Russell Coker wrote:
>> > Is it expected that running btrfsck more than once will keep reporting
>> > errors?
>>
>> Without opti
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 06:24:47AM -0600, cwillu wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Russell Coker wrote:
>> > Is it expected that running btrfsck more than once will keep reporting
>> > errors?
>>
>
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Jan Beranek wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm preparing a strorage pool for large data with quite low importance
> - there will be at least 3 hdd in "-d single" and "-m raid1"
> configuration.
>
> mkfs.btrfs -d single -m raid1 /dev/sda /dev/sdb /dec/sdc
>
> What happen if on
>> # rm -rf *
>> rm: cannot remove 'drivers/misc/lis3lv02d/lis3lv02d.c': Stale NFS file handle
>> rm: cannot remove 'drivers/misc/lis3lv02d/lis3lv02d.c': Stale NFS file handle
>> rm: cannot remove 'drivers/misc/lis3lv02d/lis3lv02d.c': Stale NFS file handle
>> rm: cannot remove 'drivers/misc/lis3lv0
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 20:42:28 +0100
> Stefan Priebe wrote:
>
> I might be wrong here, but doesn't this
>
>> rsync: rename
>> "/mnt/.software/kernel/linux-3.9-rc3/drivers/infiniband/hw/amso1100/""
>> ->
>> ".software/kernel/linux-3.9-rc3/driv
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:39 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
wrote:
> Already tried with value 5 did not help ;-( and it also happens with plain cp
> copying a 15gb file and aborts at about 80%
You tried -musage=5? Your original email said -dusage=5.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:54 AM, Joeri Vanthienen
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a question about replacing a drive in raid10 (and linux kernel 3.8.4).
> A bad disk was physical removed from the server. After this a new disk
> was added with "btrfs device add /dev/sdg /btrfs" to the raid10 btrfs
> FS
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 11:41 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Creating a btrfs file system using
> btrfs-progs-0.20.rc1.20130308git704a08c-1.fc19, and either kernel
> 3.6.10-4.fc18 or 3.9.0-0.rc3.git0.3.fc19, makes a file system that cannot be
> mounted by kernel 3.6.10-4.fc18. It can be mounted by k
> Actually instead of netconsole we have an awesome service provided by Carey,
> you
> can just do
>
> nc cwillu.com 10101 < /dev/kmsg
... at a root prompt.
> after you've run sysrq+w and then reply with the URL it spits out. Thanks,
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Roger Binns wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 28/04/13 12:57, Harald Glatt wrote:
>> If you want better answers ...
>
> There is a lot of good information at the wiki and it does see regular
> updates. For example the performance moun
[how'd that send button get there]
space_cache is the default, set by mkfs, for a year or so now. It's
sticky, so even if it wasn't, you'd only need to mount with it once.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.o
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Stephen Weinberg wrote:
> I ran into a panic while running find -xdev | xargs brtfs fi defrag '{}'. I
> don't remember the exact command because the history was not saved. I also
> started and stopped it a few times however.
>
> The kernel logs were on a different
ened. I wonder if it is useful to
>> you and where to send it. I just don't want to upload jpegs right here to
>> the list without asking first.
>>
>> The big plus is: Altough I had to hard-reset the frozen system several
>> times now, btrfs survived the procedure
> At the moment I am using:
> defaults,noatime,nodiratime,ssd,subvol=@home
No need to specify ssd, it's automatically detected.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Harald Glatt wrote:
> I don't know a better way to check than doing df -h before and
> after... If you use space_cache you have to clear_cache though to make
> the numbers be current for sure each time before looking at df.
Not sure what you're thinking of; space_
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:09:00PM +0200, Hendrik Friedel wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'd appreciate your recommendation on this:
>>
>> I have three hdd with 3TB each. I intend to use them as raid5 eventually.
>> currently I use them like this:
>>
>>
Does anything show up in dmesg when you mount?
If mount just hangs, do an alt-sysrq-w, and then post what that sends to dmesg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.
> Making this with all 6 devices from the beginning and btrfsck doesn't
> segfault. But it also doesn't repair the system enough to make it
> mountable. ( nether does -o recover, however -o degraded works, and
> files
> are then accessible )
Not sure I entirely follow: mounting with -o degraded (n
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Rick van Rein wrote:
> Hello,
>
> For over a year now, I've been experimenting with stacked filesystems as a
> way to save on resources. A basic OS layer is shared among Containers, each
> of which stacks a layer with modifications on top of it. This approach m
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 10:45 PM, spiralofhope wrote:
> I find the mailing list too busy. Is there an announce mailing list or
> some other simple way to get notified when a stable is released?
That'll only ever be in a new kernel release; there isn't a separate
release cycle for btrfs.
--
To uns
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 6:04 AM, Lars Bahner
wrote:
> I have sinned!
>
> I had a production filesystem without a replica - which is bonked :(
Grr...
> Running restore ( i have tried Debian's btrfs-tools; master and
> dangerdonteveruse branches version ) on kernels 3.2 and 3.3 I
> consistently ge
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Alexander Block
wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Alexander Block
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I would like to start a discussion on atime in Btrfs (and possibly
>> other filesystems with snapshot support).
>>
>> As atime is updated on every access of a file o
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:18 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 08:40:10AM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
>> > Is there any way to mark existing snapshots as read-only? Making new
>> > ones read-only is easy enough, but what about existing ones?
>>
>> We have code in the kernel side, so wha
I can't help much at the moment, but the following will help sort things out:
Can you provide as much detail as possible about how things were
configured at the time of the failure? Raid levels used, kernel
versions at the time of the failure, how the disks are connected,
general description of t
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Felix Blanke wrote:
>
>
> On 5/30/12 12:14 AM, Maxim Mikheev wrote:
>>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> I recently decided to use btrfs. It works perfectly for a week even
>> under heavy load. Yesterday I destroyed backups as cannot afford to have
>> ~10TB in backups. I decid
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Maxim Mikheev wrote:
> Thank you for your answer.
>
>
> The system kernel was and now:
>
> Linux s0 3.4.0-030400-generic #201205210521 SMP Mon May 21 09:22:02 UTC 2012
> x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> the raid was created by:
> mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev
>> The big reason it isn't here yet is because Kay had this neat patch
>> to blkid and udev to just put all the info you need into /dev/btrfs
>> (or some other suitable location). It would allow you to see which
>> devices belong to which filesystems etc.
>
> "btrfs" should work even without any "
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Lenz Grimmer wrote:
> On Ubuntu 11.10 "Oneiric" with gcc 4.6.1, compiling the btrfs tools from git
> fails for me with the following error:
Which git repo?
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git
builds on ubuntu just fine (just checked
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Arnd Hannemann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> using btrfs with LVM snapshots seems to be confusing /proc/mounts
> After mounting a snapshot of an original filesystem, the devicename of the
> original filesystem is overwritten with that of the snapshot in /proc/mounts.
If the lvm
Try -o recovery under a 3.4 or later kernel
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Иван Смирнов
wrote:
> Hi!
> The problem is that the BTRFS raid10 filesystem without any
> understandable cause refuses to mount.
> Here is dmesg output:
> [77847.845540] device label linux-btrfs-raid10 devid 3 transid 4
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Swâmi Petaramesh wrote:
> You're painfully right Roman,
>
> A freshly formatted 1 GB BTRFS filesystem on which 81 MB of data has been
> put shows only ~260 MB of free space and reserves something like 2 x 380 MB
> of metadata.
>
> This is absolutely ridiculous of
> * Note that 1gb is still considered a very rather btrfs filesystem,
> for which mixed mode is recommended!
Deleted the wrong word: "a rather small btrfs filesystem" is what I intended.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord..
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Jochen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to run btrfs-convert on a system that has three raid partitions
> (boot/md1, swap/md2 and root/md3). When I boot a rescue system from md1, and
> try to run "btrfs-convert /dev/md3", it complains that /dev/md3 is already
> mounted,
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Marios Titas wrote:
> When I create a btrfs volume of size strictly less than 256 MiB then if I do
> mount /dev/sdb1 /mnt/test
> the kernel tries unsuccessfully to do the mount with many other file systems
> before successfully trying with btrfs. For volumes of
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> index ecaad40..9f2416c 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> @@ -1738,10 +1738,6 @@ int btrfs_init_new_device(struct btrfs_root *root,
> char *device_path)
>
> device->fs_devices = root->fs_info->fs_devices;
> [ 186.277795] Btrfs detected SSD devices, enabling SSD mode
> [ 188.477443] btrfs: unlinked 6 orphans
> [ 188.477451] btrfs: truncated 1 orphans
> [ 411.837015] btrfs: unlinked 13 orphans
> [ 414.373500] btrfs: unlinked 35 orphans
>
> This seems to hint that I lost random files and that I do
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 4:46 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> On 08/02/2012 04:25 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> We need an smb_mb() before waitqueue_active to avoid missing wakeups.
>> Before Mitch was hitting a deadlock between the ordered flushers and the
>> transaction commit because the ordered flushers were wa
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 7:46 AM, Arne Jansen wrote:
> On 02.08.2012 13:57, Liu Bo wrote:
>> On 08/02/2012 07:40 PM, Arne Jansen wrote:
>>> On 02.08.2012 13:34, Liu Bo wrote:
On 08/02/2012 07:18 PM, Arne Jansen wrote:
> On 02.08.2012 12:36, Liu Bo wrote:
>> On 08/02/2012 06:30 PM, Stefa
>> If I understand correctly, if I don't use LVM, then such move and resize
>> operations can't be done for an online filesystem and it has more risk.
>
> You can resize, add, and remove devices from btrfs online without the
> need for LVM. IIRC LVM has finer granularity though, you can do
> someth
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:09 PM, cwillu wrote:
>>>> If I understand correctly, if I don't use LVM, then such move and resize
>>>> operations can't be done for an online filesystem and it has more r
You _need_ to use a recent kernel; 2.6.32 is nearly 3 years old, which
is prehistoric in btrfs terms.
It may Just Work in 3.5; if it doesn't, try 3.5 with -o recovery.
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Stefan Harwarth
wrote:
> Hi btrfs people,
>
> I've been using btrfs for 2 months or so. After a
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Stefan Harwarth
wrote:
> Hi cwillu,
>
> thanks for the quick reply. I didn't realize that my debian 6 was shipping
> such an old btrfs/kernel package - though I should have known better :(
>
> Anyways I already tried to recover my fil
On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Shentino wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Michael wrote:
>> Please make sure you are running a very recent kernel. Btrfs is VERY
>> active and fixes for things like this are going in all the time. Any
>> related crash errors, kernel oopses, and exact metho
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Sam Thursfield
wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've been running btrfs in various VMs for a while, and periodically I've
> experienced corruption in the filesystems being used. None of the data is
> important, but I'd like to track down how the corruption occurred in the
> first pl
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:
> To check the duplicated super blocks, use BTRFS_SUPER_MIRROR_MAX
> as the loops limit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui
> ---
> fs/btrfs/disk-io.c |2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/di
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:17:47AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
>> I had a btrfs built on top of 5 drives (dmcrypt devices).
>>
>> The drive then died while I was writing to the filesystem and my system
>> crashed and rebooted:
>>
>> [384555.53402
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 6:02 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:59:34AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
>> > Yes, this is useful, thanks. I'm thinking if it's ok to stop on
>> > first error, ie. when the subvolume does not exist or is a directory.
>>
>> I am fine with either ways. I sh
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Alfredo Esteban wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm sending a patch to show progress of btrfs-convert command. I put a
> progress bar in the only heavy process: the btrfs metadata creation
> (due to CRC calculation):
Please include patches inline in the email, not as an attac
This currently applies on top of Josef's df patches.
Currently, a series of utilities are necessary to get an approximate answer to
the question "How much disk space do I have free?". Previously, df returned
numbers which, while accurate, weren't useful: the physical disk size isn't
intere
> Today while playing around with btrfs I uncovered what must be a bug in the
> btrfs checksum code. My kernel log received a couple of these messages with
> various ino and off numbers:
>
> btrfs csum failed ino 5098 off 524288 csum 2981133980 private 959545494
> [..]
>
> This happens on reading
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 1:58 PM, Felipe Contreras
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Calvin Walton
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 03:30 +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>> I use btrfs on most of my volumes on my laptop, and I've always felt
>>> booting was very slow, but definitely sure
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 4:17 AM, Felix Blanke wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I saw some reports of ppl in this list who did a "btrfs fi df /path" and saw
> the
> raidlevel of the data, metadata etc.
>
> How? :)
>
> I'm using the git version of the btrfs progs and 2.6.36, but I don't see those
> informations.
>
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 4:55 AM, Daniel J Blueman
wrote:
> On 1 November 2010 00:35, Andreas Bauer wrote:
>> So I conclude that these messages are faulty because data is read correctly.
>> In addition, when you have more than one btrfs you cannot see from the
>> message
>> which fs it is referi
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 5:55 AM, Helmut Hullen wrote:
> Hallo, Felix,
>
> Du meintest am 01.11.10:
>
> btrfs-convert: extent-tree.c:2529: btrfs_reserve_extent:
> Assertion `!(ret)' failed
> Abgebrochen
>
Try btrfs-convert -r /dev/xxx, hopefully it will recover your ext2.
>
>>
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 6:14 AM, Felix Blanke wrote:
> Ah, the magic one :)
>
> Is that a patch for the kernel or the btrfs progs?
>
>
> If you know where to get that patch it would be nice. It isn't an important
> issue but it
> would be nice to see if my home really uses raid1 for data :)
Kerne
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Morten P.D. Stevens
wrote:
> Here is a small btrfs vs. ext4 benchmark with kernel 2.6.37-rc1.
>
> compilebench with options -i 10 -r 30 on 2.6.37-rc1
>
> btrfs
>
> ==
> intial create total runs
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Leonidas Spyropoulos
wrote:
> While on Ubuntu 10.10 I cannot get defragment working.
>
> ing...@selene:~$ btrfs filesystem defragment /media/Data/
> ioctl failed on /media/Data/ ret -1 errno 1
> total 1 failures
> ...
> Is it implemented on kernel 2.6.36 and above o
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 1:32 AM, david grant wrote:
> Hugo, you told me how to mount a snapshot. Thank you, that works but you
> didn't tell me how to boot into it.
He also gave you the command to set the default subvolume/snapshot
used if you don't provide one: "btrfs subvolume set-default
".
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 10:07 PM, David Nicol wrote:
>>
>> I've been thinking about this for a while, from a perspective of how
>> to make it work by allocating i-node numbers from a global pool, but
>> yesterday I realized that offering the feature wou
>>> One thing I would like to see is copy-on-write hard-links. The hard-links
>>> that span snapshots should be possible, but they should be copy-on-write,
>>> i.e. as soon as hard-linked file that spans snapshots is written, the
>>> snapshot that wrote it should have it's own forked copy hencefort
gt; used rootflags and it worked!!
>
> So, cwillu, after your scolding of me and your (perfectly reasonable)
> questioning of my understanding, I did get it together for booting.
>
> BUT I am still left with the problem that caused it for me: how do I
> backup (clone?) a btrfs fil
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 1:48 AM, Helmut Hullen wrote:
> Hallo, Evert,
>
> Du meintest am 04.12.10 zum Thema Re: 800 GByte free, but "no space left":
>
>> On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Helmut Hullen
>> wrote:
>>> Hallo,
>>>
>>> I wrote am 02.12.10:
>>>
I use 2 disks (1.5 Tbyte and 2.0 TByte
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 3:51 AM, Helmut Hullen wrote:
> Hallo, cwillu,
>
> Du meintest am 05.12.10:
>
>>>> I am not an expert on this by a long shot, but it looks like you
>>>> added these two disks in raid0.
>
>>> I won't hope that this error
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 8:24 AM, Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 of December 2010 22:53:25 William Sheffler wrote:
>> Hello btrfs community.
>>
>> First off, thanks for all your hard work... I have been following
>> btrfs with interest for several years now and very much look forward
>> to t
1 - 100 of 260 matches
Mail list logo
