BTRFS and databases

a blessing, with databases it's a drawback). But are there any advantages of still sticking to BTRFS for a database albeit CoW is disabled, or should I just return to the old and reliable ext4 for those applications? Kind regards, MegaBrutal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubs

Can rsync use reflink to synchronize directories?

Hi all, Does rsync support copying files with reflink on local btrfs file system? Of course it could only work if the necessary conditions for reflinking are met, but it would be very useful. Regards, MegaBrutal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-

Re: File system is oddly full after kernel upgrade, balance doesn't help

, why the global reserve sneaked up to 512 MB for such a small file system, and how could I resolve this situation. Any ideas? MegaBrutal 2017-01-28 7:46 GMT+01:00 Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net>: > MegaBrutal posted on Fri, 27 Jan 2017 19:45:00 +0100 as excerpted: > >>

File system is oddly full after kernel upgrade, balance doesn't help

attempt resulted in this: /dev/mapper/vmdata--vg-lxc--curlybrace 2048 1302 162 89% /tmp/mnt/curlybrace So... it became slightly worse. What's going on? How can I fix the file system to show real data? Regards, MegaBrutal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubs

Re: "No space left on device" and balance doesn't work

2016-06-03 14:43 GMT+02:00 Austin S. Hemmelgarn : > > Also, since you're on a new enough kernel, try 'lazytime' in the mount > options as well, this defers all on-disk timestamp updates for up to 24 hours > or until the inode gets written out anyway, but keeps the updated

Re: "No space left on device" and balance doesn't work

2016-06-02 0:22 GMT+02:00 Henk Slager : > What is the kernel version used? > Is the fs on a mechanical disk or SSD? > What are the mount options? > How old is the fs? Linux 4.4.0-22-generic (Ubuntu 16.04). Mechanical disks in LVM. Mount: /dev/mapper/centrevg-rootlv on / type

Re: "No space left on device" and balance doesn't work

e start -dusage=5 / > btrfs fi balance start -dusage=10 / > btrfs fi balance start -dusage=20 / > > > 2016-06-01 20:30 GMT+02:00 MegaBrutal <megabru...@gmail.com>: >> Hi all, >> >> I have a 20 GB file system and df says I have about 2,6 GB free spa

"No space left on device" and balance doesn't work

the FS usage reaches 90%, so then I know I have to delete some old snapshots. It worked so far, I cleaned the snapshots at 90%, FS usage fell back, everyone was happy. But now the alert didn't even trigger because the FS is at 88% usage, so it shouldn't be full yet. Best regards an

Re: PROBLEM: #89121 BTRFS mixes up mounted devices with their snapshots

2014-12-04 6:15 GMT+01:00 Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net: Which is why I'm running an initramfs for the first time since I've switched to btrfs raid1 mode root, as I quit with initrds back before initramfs was an option. An initramfs appended to the kernel image beats a separate initrd, but I'd

Re: PROBLEM: #89121 BTRFS mixes up mounted devices with their snapshots

2014-12-02 8:50 GMT+01:00 Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it: On 12/02/2014 01:15 AM, MegaBrutal wrote: 2014-12-02 0:24 GMT+01:00 Robert White rwh...@pobox.com: On 12/01/2014 02:10 PM, MegaBrutal wrote: Since having duplicate UUIDs on devices is not a problem for me since I can tell them

PROBLEM: #89121 BTRFS mixes up mounted devices with their snapshots

here: http://undead.megabrutal.com/kvm-reproduce-1391429.img.xz (Download size: 113 MB; Unpacked image size: 2 GB.) Re-tested with mainline kernel 3.18.0-rc7 just today. Regards, MegaBrutal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord

Re: Possible to undo subvol delete?

2014-12-01 14:12 GMT+01:00 Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com: We might want to consider adding an option to btrfs subvol del to ask for confirmation (or make it do so by default and add an option to disable asking for confirmation). I've also noticed, a subvolume can just be deleted

Re: Possible to undo subvol delete?

2014-12-01 14:47 GMT+01:00 Roman Mamedov r...@romanrm.net: On Mon, 1 Dec 2014 14:38:16 +0100 MegaBrutal megabru...@gmail.com wrote: I've also noticed, a subvolume can just be deleted with an rm -r, just like an ordinary directory. I'd consider to only allow subvolume deletions with exact

Re: PROBLEM: #89121 BTRFS mixes up mounted devices with their snapshots

2014-12-01 18:27 GMT+01:00 Robert White rwh...@pobox.com: On 12/01/2014 04:56 AM, MegaBrutal wrote: Since the other thread went off into theoretical debates about UUIDs and their generic relation to BTRFS, their everyday use cases, and the philosophical meaning behind uniqueness of copies

Re: PROBLEM: #89121 BTRFS mixes up mounted devices with their snapshots

2014-12-02 0:24 GMT+01:00 Robert White rwh...@pobox.com: On 12/01/2014 02:10 PM, MegaBrutal wrote: Since having duplicate UUIDs on devices is not a problem for me since I can tell them apart by LVM names, the discussion is of little relevance to my use case. Of course it's interesting and I

Re: Possible to undo subvol delete?

2014-12-01 17:39 GMT+01:00 Shriramana Sharma samj...@gmail.com: When btrfs has so many features (esp snapshots) to prevent user accidentally deleting data (I liked especially http://www.youtube.com/v/9H7e6BcI5Fo?start=209) I think there has to be *some* modicum of support for warning against

Re: Possible to undo subvol delete?

2014-12-02 4:40 GMT+01:00 Shriramana Sharma samj...@gmail.com: Well in office environs, where the root password is with a certain person only, then that's fine because that person is going to be wary of doing anything that's make others angry at them, but on single-user systems, one's regular

Re: PROBLEM: #89121 BTRFS mixes up mounted devices with their snapshots

2014-12-01 22:45 GMT+01:00 Konstantin newsbox1...@web.de: MegaBrutal schrieb am 01.12.2014 um 13:56: Hi all, I've reported the bug I've previously posted about in BTRFS messes up snapshot LV with origin in the Kernel Bug Tracker. https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89121 Hi

BTRFS equivalent for tune2fs?

Hi all, I know there is a btrfstune, but it doesn't provide all the functionality I'm thinking of. For ext2/3/4 file systems I can get a bunch of useful data with tune2fs -l. How can I retrieve the same type of information about a BTRFS file system? (E.g., last mount time, last checked time,

Re: BTRFS messes up snapshot LV with origin

2014-11-29 2:25 GMT+01:00 Robert White rwh...@pobox.com: On 11/28/2014 09:05 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: For the disk autodetection, I still convinced that it is a sane default to skip the lvm-snapshot No... please don't... Maybe offer an option to select between snapshots or

Re: BTRFS messes up snapshot LV with origin

2014-11-18 16:42 GMT+01:00 Phillip Susi ps...@ubuntu.com: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/18/2014 1:16 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: If fstab specifies rootfs as UUID, and there are two volumes with the same UUID, it’s now ambiguous which one at boot time is the intended

Re: BTRFS messes up snapshot LV with origin

2014-11-17 7:59 GMT+01:00 Brendan Hide bren...@swiftspirit.co.za: Grub is already a little smart here - it avoids snapshots. But in this case it is relying on the UUID and only finding it in the snapshot. So possibly this is a bug in grub affecting the bug reporter specifically - but perhaps

Fwd: BTRFS messes up snapshot LV with origin

2014-11-17 20:04 GMT+01:00 Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it: Regarding b) I am bit confused: if I understood correctly, the root filesystem was picked from a LVM-snapshot, so grub-probe *correctly* reported that the root device is the snapshot. This is not what happens. The system

BTRFS messes up snapshot LV with origin

Hello guys, I think you'll like this... https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1391429 MegaBrutal -- 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

Re: Quota reached: can't delete

Arne Jansen sensille at gmx.net writes: On 24.01.2013 16:12, Jerome M wrote: Hi, With the current btrfs quota implementation, when you reach a subvolume quota limit, you can't delete anything without first removing the limit or enlarge it: rm: cannot remove `testfile.bin': Disk

BTRFS over LVM remounts read-only

subvolumes elsewhere until I restart the system. Probably my description of the problem wasn't detailed enough, but since I'm totally clueless about the problem (not counting the possible bad sectors), I can't tell more right now. But you can ask more details and I'll try to answer. MegaBrutal btrfs

Re: BTRFS over LVM remounts read-only

2014/1/11 Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk: [60631.481913] attempt to access beyond end of device [60631.481935] dm-1: rw=1073, want=42917896, limit=42917888 [60631.481941] btrfs_dev_stat_print_on_error: 34 callbacks suppressed [60631.481949] btrfs: bdev /dev/mapper/vmhost--vg-vmhost--rootfs