Start weitergeleitete Nachricht: Huh, turns out the Reply-To was to Chris Murphy, so here it is again for the whole list.
Datum: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 20:34:34 +0200 Von: Marc Joliet <mar...@gmx.de> An: Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com> Betreff: Re: ENOSPC errors during balance Am Sat, 19 Jul 2014 11:38:08 -0600 schrieb Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com>: > The 2nd dmesg (didn't look at the 1st), has many instances like this; > > [96241.882138] ata2.00: exception Emask 0x1 SAct 0x7ffe0fff SErr 0x0 action > 0x6 frozen > [96241.882139] ata2.00: Ata error. fis:0x21 > [96241.882142] ata2.00: failed command: READ FPDMA QUEUED > [96241.882148] ata2.00: cmd 60/08:00:68:0a:2d/00:00:18:00:00/40 tag 0 ncq > 4096 in > res 41/00:58:40:5c:2c/00:00:18:00:00/40 Emask 0x1 (device error) > > I'm not sure what this error is, it acts like an unrecoverable read error but > I'm not seeing UNC reported. It looks like ata 2.00 is sdb, which is a member > of a btrfs raid10 volume. So this isn't related to your sdg2 and enospc > error, it's a different problem. Yeah, from what I remember reading it's related to nforce2 chipsets, but I never pursued it, since I never really noticed any consequences (this is an old computer that I originally build in 2006). IIRC one workaround is to switch to 1.5gpbs instead of 3gbps (but then, it already is at 1.5 Gbps, but none of the other ports are? Might be the hard drive, I *think* it's older than the others.), another is related to irqbalance (which I forgot about, I've just switched it off and will see if the messages stop, but then again, my first dmesg didn't have any of those messages). Anyway, yes, it's unrelated to my problem :-) . > I'm not sure of the reason for the "BTRFS info (device sdg2): 2 enospc errors > during balance" but it seems informational rather than either a warning or > problem. I'd treat ext4->btrfs converted file systems to be something of an > odd duck, in that it's uncommon, therefore isn't getting as much testing and > extra caution is a good idea. Make frequent backups. Well, I *could* just recreate the file system. Since these are my only backups (no offsite backup as of yet), I wanted to keep the existing ones. So btrfs-convert was a convenient way to upgrade. But since I ended up deleting those backups anyway, I would only be losing my hourly and a few daily backups. But it's not as if the file system is otherwise misbehaving. Another random idea: the number of errors decreased the second time I ran balance (from 4 to 2), I could run another full balance and see if it keeps decreasing. -- Marc Joliet -- "People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup -- Marc Joliet -- "People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
