Am Dienstag, 5. August 2014, 14:58:34 schrieb Clemens Eisserer:
Hi Russel,
The Debian installer has BTRFS in a list of filesystems to choose with no
special notice about it. I'm thinking of filing a Debian bug requesting
that they put a warning against it.
As long as it is not
Am Montag, 4. August 2014, 11:09:23 schrieb Peter Waller:
On 4 August 2014 10:39, Chris Samuel ch...@csamuel.org wrote:
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 09:14:19 AM Peter Waller wrote:
All of this is *very* surprising.
Hmm, it shouldn't be, the ENOSPC issues are well known and have been
discussed
Chris Samuel posted on Mon, 04 Aug 2014 20:24:46 +1000 as excerpted:
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 11:56:46 AM Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Which doesn't protect the *average* user from running into issues like
this.
No, but they need to be aware of it.
Actually, an ordinary user/admin /should/ have no
Austin S Hemmelgarn posted on Mon, 04 Aug 2014 13:09:23 -0400 as
excerpted:
Think of each chunk like a box, and each block as a block, and that you
have two different types of block (data and metadata) and two different
types of box (also data and metadata). The data boxes are four times the
Original Message
Subject: Re: ENOSPC with mkdir and rename
From: Peter Waller pe...@scraperwiki.com
To: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
Date: 2014年08月04日 16:14
Thanks for responses.
All of this is *very* surprising. I'm not new to BTRFS, I've been
using it on my own
On 2014-08-05 04:20, Duncan wrote:
Austin S Hemmelgarn posted on Mon, 04 Aug 2014 13:09:23 -0400 as
excerpted:
Think of each chunk like a box, and each block as a block, and that you
have two different types of block (data and metadata) and two different
types of box (also data and
Hi Russel,
The Debian installer has BTRFS in a list of filesystems to choose with no
special notice about it. I'm thinking of filing a Debian bug requesting that
they put a warning against it.
As long as it is not selected as the default filesystem, I think it is fine.
Other distributions
On 5 August 2014 13:58, Clemens Eisserer linuxhi...@gmail.com wrote:
As long as it is not selected as the default filesystem, I think it is fine.
Other distributions have been offering btrfs for some time now, too.
How do you warn non-BTRFS-developers in this case that they need to
run a
Russell Coker posted on Tue, 05 Aug 2014 22:20:33 +1000 as excerpted:
The Debian installer has BTRFS in a list of filesystems to choose with
no special notice about it. I'm thinking of filing a Debian bug
requesting that they put a warning against it.
What do people here think?
You
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 5:20 AM, Russell Coker russ...@coker.com.au wrote:
Based on what I've read on this list it seems that BTRFS is less stable in
3.15 than in 3.14. Even 3.14 isn't something I'd recommend to random people
who want something to just work.
The Debian installer has BTRFS
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 8:38 PM, ronnie sahlberg
ronniesahlb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 5:20 AM, Russell Coker russ...@coker.com.au wrote:
Based on what I've read on this list it seems that BTRFS is less stable in
3.15 than in 3.14. Even 3.14 isn't something I'd recommend to
, Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
Hi, Peter
Some explain below inline.
Original Message
Subject: ENOSPC with mkdir and rename
From: Peter Waller pe...@scraperwiki.com
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Date: 2014年08月03日 07:35
Hi All,
My TL;DR questions
Hi Peter,
All of this is *very* surprising. I'm not new to BTRFS, I've been
using it on my own machines for multiple years. I didn't realise there
was an un-holstered footgun on my lap at this point. How can it be
made clear how to avoid the ENOSPC problem to myself and other
sysadmins? Or
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 09:14:19 AM Peter Waller wrote:
All of this is *very* surprising.
Hmm, it shouldn't be, the ENOSPC issues are well known and have been discussed
here for years.
cheers,
Chris
--
Chris Samuel : http://www.csamuel.org/ : Melbourne, VIC
--
To unsubscribe from this
Hi Chris,
Hmm, it shouldn't be, the ENOSPC issues are well known and have been discussed
here for years.
Which doesn't protect the *average* user from running into issues like this.
Just because it has been discussed, doesn't mean nothing can/should be
done about it ;)
However, as I am only a
On 4 August 2014 10:39, Chris Samuel ch...@csamuel.org wrote:
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 09:14:19 AM Peter Waller wrote:
All of this is *very* surprising.
Hmm, it shouldn't be, the ENOSPC issues are well known and have been discussed
here for years.
I accept that. It's all very well if you read the
On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 11:09:23AM +0100, Peter Waller wrote:
On 4 August 2014 10:39, Chris Samuel ch...@csamuel.org wrote:
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 09:14:19 AM Peter Waller wrote:
All of this is *very* surprising.
Hmm, it shouldn't be, the ENOSPC issues are well known and have been
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 11:56:46 AM Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Which doesn't protect the *average* user from running into issues like this.
No, but they need to be aware of it.
Just because it has been discussed, doesn't mean nothing can/should be done
about it
Indeed, and a lot of work has been
On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 11:31:57AM +0100, Peter Waller wrote:
Thanks Hugo, this is the most informative e-mail yet! (more inline)
On 4 August 2014 11:22, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
* btrfs fi show
- look at the total and used values. If used total, you're OK.
If
On 4 August 2014 11:39, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
* btrfs fi df
- look at metadata used vs total. If these are close to zero (on
3.15+) or close to 512 MiB (on 3.15), then you are in danger of
ENOSPC.
Hmm. It's unfortunate that this could indicate an amount of
Thanks Hugo, this is the most informative e-mail yet! (more inline)
On 4 August 2014 11:22, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
* btrfs fi show
- look at the total and used values. If used total, you're OK.
If used == total, then you could potentially hit ENOSPC.
Another thing
On 4 August 2014 11:50, Chris Samuel ch...@csamuel.org wrote:
To be honest I'm not sure I'd suggest btrfs for production use at all at
present, it's only recently been unmarked as experimental and to be honest I
feel that was premature. :-(
Thanks for the honest answer.
There are very
Hi Hugo,
On the 3.15+ kernels, the block reserve is split out of metadata
and reported separately. This helps with the following process:
Thanks a lot for pointing this out, I hadn't noticed this change until now.
One thing I didn't find any information about is the overhead
introduced by
On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 01:04:25PM +0200, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Hi Hugo,
On the 3.15+ kernels, the block reserve is split out of metadata
and reported separately. This helps with the following process:
Thanks a lot for pointing this out, I hadn't noticed this change until now.
For anyone else having this problem, this article is fairly useful for
understanding disk full problems and rebalance:
http://marc.merlins.org/perso/btrfs/post_2014-05-04_Fixing-Btrfs-Filesystem-Full-Problems.html
It actually covers the problem that I had, which is that a rebalance
can't take
On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 02:17:02PM +0100, Peter Waller wrote:
For anyone else having this problem, this article is fairly useful for
understanding disk full problems and rebalance:
http://marc.merlins.org/perso/btrfs/post_2014-05-04_Fixing-Btrfs-Filesystem-Full-Problems.html
It actually
On 2014-08-04 09:17, Peter Waller wrote:
For anyone else having this problem, this article is fairly useful for
understanding disk full problems and rebalance:
http://marc.merlins.org/perso/btrfs/post_2014-05-04_Fixing-Btrfs-Filesystem-Full-Problems.html
It actually covers the problem that
On 4 August 2014 15:02, Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com wrote:
I really disagree with the statement that adding more storage is
difficult or expensive, all you need to do is plug in a 2G USB flash
drive, or allocate a ramdisk, and add the device to the filesystem only
long enough to
On 2014-08-04 10:11, Peter Waller wrote:
On 4 August 2014 15:02, Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com wrote:
I really disagree with the statement that adding more storage is
difficult or expensive, all you need to do is plug in a 2G USB flash
drive, or allocate a ramdisk, and add the
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 14:17:02 Peter Waller wrote:
For anyone else having this problem, this article is fairly useful for
understanding disk full problems and rebalance:
http://marc.merlins.org/perso/btrfs/post_2014-05-04_Fixing-Btrfs-Filesystem-
Full-Problems.html
It actually covers the
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Russell Coker russ...@coker.com.au wrote:
If you regularly run a scrub with options such as -dusage=50 -musage=10 then
the amount of free space in metadata chunks will tend to be a lot greater than
that in data chunks.
Just to clarify for posterity, I'm pretty
On 2014-08-04 06:31, Peter Waller wrote:
Thanks Hugo, this is the most informative e-mail yet! (more inline)
On 4 August 2014 11:22, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
* btrfs fi show
- look at the total and used values. If used total, you're OK.
If used == total, then you
Hi Peter,
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 11:59:19 AM Peter Waller wrote:
On 4 August 2014 11:50, Chris Samuel ch...@csamuel.org wrote:
To be honest I'm not sure I'd suggest btrfs for production use at all at
present, it's only recently been unmarked as experimental and to be honest
I feel that was
Hi, Peter
Some explain below inline.
Original Message
Subject: ENOSPC with mkdir and rename
From: Peter Waller pe...@scraperwiki.com
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Date: 2014年08月03日 07:35
Hi All,
My TL;DR questions are at the bottom, before the stack trace.
I'm running
-systems.btrfs/37224
Kernel: 3.15.7-031507-generic
I'm on a single block device system, i.e, no RAID.
I was observing ENOSPC from `mkdir` and `rename` on this system, with
a good amount of free disk space (df -h reports 62 GB remain). I added
enospc_debug (full umount/mount, not just mount -o
which I started on the 29th of July:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/37224
Kernel: 3.15.7-031507-generic
I'm on a single block device system, i.e, no RAID.
I was observing ENOSPC from `mkdir` and `rename` on this system, with
a good amount of free disk space (df -h
`mkdir` and `rename` on this system, with
a good amount of free disk space (df -h reports 62 GB remain). I added
enospc_debug (full umount/mount, not just mount -o remount), but this
had no apparent effect when receiving ENOSPC from userland.
$ sudo btrfs fi df /path/to/volume
Data, single: total
On Sun, 3 Aug 2014 00:35:28 Peter Waller wrote:
I'm running Ubuntu 14.04. I wonder if this problem is related to the
thread titled Machine lockup due to btrfs-transaction on AWS EC2
Ubuntu 14.04 which I started on the 29th of July:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/37224
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Russell Coker russ...@coker.com.au wrote:
On Sun, 3 Aug 2014 00:35:28 Peter Waller wrote:
I'm running Ubuntu 14.04. I wonder if this problem is related to the
thread titled Machine lockup due to btrfs-transaction on AWS EC2
Ubuntu 14.04 which I started on the
39 matches
Mail list logo
