Btrfs devel - Aug 2011 - Re: corrupted btrfs volume: parent transid verify failed

Halp!  I was recently forced to power cycle my desktop PC, and upon
restart, the btrfs /home volume would no longer mount, citing the
error "BUG: scheduling while atomic: mount /5584/0x000000002".  I
retrieved the latest btrfs-progs git repositories from
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git
and http://git.darksatanic.net/repo/btrfs-progs-unstable.git -b
integration-20110805, but when running "sudo ./btrfsck -s 1
/dev/mapper/home" from either repo builds, I receive the error "parent
transid verify failed on 647363842048 wanted 210333 found 210302"
(repeated 3x).  I''ve also tried the flags -s 0, -s 1, and -s 2, all
with the same results.

I take care to complete a full dd copy of my disk every 2 weeks, but
my previous backup is nearly 2 weeks old and I''ve put in almost 2
weeks of effort on my masters thesis since then.  I''m quite desperate
to recover this volume.  Any help is appreciated, as I''ve exhausted
the existing suggestions from the mailing list posts to date.  I''ve
tried to ask in #btrfs, but suspect that they''re all sleepy bearded
people :(

Regards,
-Yalonda
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 4:13 AM, Yalonda Gishtaka
<yalonda.gishtaka@gmail.com> wrote:
> Halp!  I was recently forced to power cycle my desktop PC, and upon
> restart, the btrfs /home volume would no longer mount, citing the
> error "BUG: scheduling while atomic: mount /5584/0x000000002".  I
> retrieved the latest btrfs-progs git repositories from
>
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git
> and http://git.darksatanic.net/repo/btrfs-progs-unstable.git -b
> integration-20110805, but when running "sudo ./btrfsck -s 1
> /dev/mapper/home" from either repo builds, I receive the error
"parent
> transid verify failed on 647363842048 wanted 210333 found 210302"
> (repeated 3x).  I''ve also tried the flags -s 0, -s 1, and -s 2,
all
> with the same results.
Is there something in the log about replaying log? If yes, try btrfs-zero-log
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Problem_FAQ

-- 
Fajar
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Fajar,

Thank you for the suggestion.  Unfortunately, running "sudo
./btrfs-zero-log /dev/mapper/home" results in the same "parent transid
verify failed on 647363842048 wanted 210333 found 210302" errors,
repeated 3 times.

I am running Arch Linux with the latest 3.0.1 kernel on a x86_64 machine.

Regards,
-Yalonda

On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Fajar A. Nugraha <list@fajar.net>
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 4:13 AM, Yalonda Gishtaka
> <yalonda.gishtaka@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Halp!  I was recently forced to power cycle my desktop PC, and upon
>> restart, the btrfs /home volume would no longer mount, citing the
>> error "BUG: scheduling while atomic: mount
/5584/0x000000002".  I
>> retrieved the latest btrfs-progs git repositories from
>>
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git
>> and http://git.darksatanic.net/repo/btrfs-progs-unstable.git -b
>> integration-20110805, but when running "sudo ./btrfsck -s 1
>> /dev/mapper/home" from either repo builds, I receive the error
"parent
>> transid verify failed on 647363842048 wanted 210333 found 210302"
>> (repeated 3x).  I''ve also tried the flags -s 0, -s 1, and -s
2, all
>> with the same results.
>
> Is there something in the log about replaying log? If yes, try
btrfs-zero-log
> https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Problem_FAQ
>
> --
> Fajar
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On 08/14/2011 04:13 PM, Yalonda Gishtaka wrote:
> I''m quite desperate
> to recover this volume.
You should have had backups.

Btrfs has no file system repair tool, but it is supposed to be out soon 
(tm). You will have to wait.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

"Soon" seems a bit subjective given that the devs have been touting
this since the beginning of time.

/Helpful/ advice would be nice.

This blog posting
(http://stujordan.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/churning-the-butter/)
sounded promising, but none of the superblock copies on my btrfs
volume are ok, as I keep receiving the same "parent transid verify
failed" messages.  Will be released btrfsck tool handle this case?

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 1:10 AM, Michael Cronenworth <mike@cchtml.com>
wrote:
> On 08/14/2011 04:13 PM, Yalonda Gishtaka wrote:
>>
>> I''m quite desperate
>> to recover this volume.
>
> You should have had backups.
>
> Btrfs has no file system repair tool, but it is supposed to be out soon
> (tm). You will have to wait.
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Telling someone (that has a ~2 week stale backup) that they should
have kept backups is hardly constructive.  We''re all aware
there''s no
official btrfs repair tool.  But it appears there has been been some
hard, dedicated work towards this that has resulted in many commits
and patches.  I''m here to find out what there is to know about recent
developments that may help my current situation.  Please consider
offering helpful advice instead of pointing out the obvious about my
backup schedule.

Cheers,
-Yalonda

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 1:51 AM, Michael Cronenworth <mike@cchtml.com>
wrote:
> On 08/14/2011 06:32 PM, Yalonda Gishtaka wrote:
>>
>> /Helpful/  advice would be nice.
>
> Being hostile will net you zero advice.
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Hi Yolanda,

are you using compression? If not and you were also using something like
LaTeX for yout thesis you could use grep to locate it on e.g. /dev/sda
then copy it out there and at least have you thesis work saved. 
I did something like that once and it worked nicely

Lg Niklas

On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 02:16 +0200, Yalonda Gishtaka
wrote:
> Telling someone (that has a ~2 week stale backup) that they should
> have kept backups is hardly constructive.  We''re all aware
there''s no
> official btrfs repair tool.  But it appears there has been been some
> hard, dedicated work towards this that has resulted in many commits
> and patches.  I''m here to find out what there is to know about
recent
> developments that may help my current situation.  Please consider
> offering helpful advice instead of pointing out the obvious about my
> backup schedule.
> 
> Cheers,
> -Yalonda
> 
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 1:51 AM, Michael Cronenworth
<mike@cchtml.com> wrote:
> > On 08/14/2011 06:32 PM, Yalonda Gishtaka wrote:
> >>
> >> /Helpful/  advice would be nice.
> >
> > Being hostile will net you zero advice.
> >
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

There are patches elsewhere in the mailing list to allow one to mount
a broken-due-to-transid-mismatch  filesystem readonly, which should
work in this case.

Regarding your backup regimen, consider using rsync instead of dd:
after the initial backup, rsync can update the existing backup _much_
more quickly, making it practical to do a backup every night, or even
multiple times a day.  dd also has the downside of potentially
_really_ confusing btrfs if it ever sees the backup and the original
at the same time.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

> Regarding your backup regimen, consider using rsync instead of dd:
> after the initial backup, rsync can update the existing backup _much_
> more quickly, making it practical to do a backup every night, or even
> multiple times a day.  dd also has the downside of potentially
> _really_ confusing btrfs if it ever sees the backup and the original
> at the same time.
A still better option is to use an online backup service such as crashplan
or spideroak, as that way your backups are also safe from fire or theft.
Also most will automatically create incremental backups several times per
hour, so that you can access old versions of your file easily.

Crashplan has a free online backup service where you backup to a
friend''s
computer over the internet instead of to their servers. Another cheap
alternative for small and very important files is to email them to your
google mail account so you can retrieve lost files from any computer.

I know of one Comp Sci professor who advises all his students to use that
email method of backup for important thesis and suchlike as well as any
other backup method. His argument is that if a student''s room mate gets
arrested, then the cops are likely to take away all computers and backup
media, so in that case an online backup will be the only usable one.

-- 
David Pottage

Error compiling committee.c To many arguments to function.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html