similar to: btrfs RAID1 woes and tiered storage

It''s been nearly a year since the patches needed to implement a reflinked copy between subvolumes have been posted (http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/9865 ) and I still get "Invalid cross-device link" error with Linux 3.2.4 while I try to do a cp --reflink between subvolumes. This is a *very* useful feature to have (think offline file-level

Hi all! I want to use 'acl group control' setting to delegate privileges to specific administrators. Unfortunately, I'm unable to set the primary group using windows file permissions dialog, I can only add and remove ACL groups. I tried to do this by removing all groups but one from Windows. This doesn't work: the primary group has all privs removed and the extra group is

Does anyone have any ideas about how to fix, or to work-around the following issue? Thanks! Bug 1549714 - On sharded tiered volume, only first shard of new file goes on hot tier. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1549714 On sharded tiered volume, only first shard of new file goes on hot tier. On a sharded tiered volume, only the first shard of a new file goes on the hot tier, the rest

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Viktor Nosov" <vnosov at stonefly.com> > To: gluster-users at gluster.org > Cc: vnosov at stonefly.com > Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 5:45:25 PM > Subject: [Gluster-users] Testing sharding on tiered volume > > Hi, > > I'm looking to use sharding on tiered volume. This is very attractive > feature that could

I plan to upgrade an existing C7 computer which currently has one 256 GB SSD to use mdadmin software RAID1 after adding two 4 TB M2. SSDs, the rest of the system remaining the same. The system also has one additional internal and one external harddisk but these should not be touched. The system will continue to run C7. If I remember correctly, the existing SSD does not use a M2. slot so they

Hi, I'm looking to use sharding on tiered volume. This is very attractive feature that could benefit tiered volume to let it handle larger files without hitting the "out of (hot)space problem". I decided to set test configuration on GlusterFS 3.12.3 when tiered volume has 2TB cold and 1GB hot segments. Shard size is set to be 16MB. For testing 100GB files are used. It seems writes

Tested it in two different environments lately with exactly same results. Was trying to get better read performance from local mounts with hundreds of thousands maildir email files by using SSD, hoping that .gluster file stat read will improve which does migrate to hot tire. After seeing what you described for 24 hours and confirming all move around on the tires is done - killed it. Here are my

Hi Timo, We are observing some weird behaviour when we try to rename an inferior folder, followed by the superior folder. These folders have an asterisk in the name. * LIST (\HasChildren) "." "*Own Family" * LIST (\HasChildren) "." "*Own Family.Tour" * LIST (\HasNoChildren) "." "*Own Family.Maid" * LIST (\HasNoChildren)

On 01/11/2023 01:33 PM, H wrote: > On 01/11/2023 02:09 AM, Simon Matter wrote: >> What I usually do is this: "cut" the large disk into several pieces of >> equal size and create individual RAID1 arrays. Then add them as LVM PVs to >> one large VG. The advantage is that with one error on one disk, you wont >> lose redundancy on the whole RAID mirror but only on

I am fighting this issue: Bug 1540376 ? Tiered volume performance degrades badly after a volume stop/start or system restart. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540376 Does anyone have any ideas on what might be causing this, and what a fix or work-around might be? Thanks! ~ Jeff Byers ~ Tiered volume performance degrades badly after a volume stop/start or system restart. The

This problem appears to be related to the sqlite3 DB files that are used for the tiering file access counters, stored on each hot and cold tier brick in .glusterfs/<volname>.db. When the tier is first created, these DB files do not exist, they are created, and everything works fine. On a stop/start or service restart, the .db files are already present, albeit empty since I don't have

> Follow-up question: Is my proposed strategy below correct: > - Make a copy of all existing directories and files on the current disk using clonezilla. > - Install the new M.2 SSDs. > - Partitioning the new SSDs for RAID1 using an external tool. > - Doing a minimal installation of C7 and mdraid. > - If choosing three RAID partitions, one for /boot, one for /boot/efi and the

Hello, I''m trying to setup what I thought would be a fairly basic tiered shaping system. I have a 6mbit (768kbps) link coming into my eth1 device, with my LAN IPs on the eth0 device. I want to limit outgoing traffic so that certain IPs are limited to 400kbps, with 3 classes under that 400k so certain machines get prioritized (main servers in 1:21, other servers in 1:22, workstations

> On 01/11/2023 01:33 PM, H wrote: >> On 01/11/2023 02:09 AM, Simon Matter wrote: >>> What I usually do is this: "cut" the large disk into several pieces of >>> equal size and create individual RAID1 arrays. Then add them as LVM PVs >>> to >>> one large VG. The advantage is that with one error on one disk, you >>> wont >>>

> On 01/11/2023 02:09 AM, Simon Matter wrote: >> What I usually do is this: "cut" the large disk into several pieces of >> equal size and create individual RAID1 arrays. Then add them as LVM PVs >> to >> one large VG. The advantage is that with one error on one disk, you wont >> lose redundancy on the whole RAID mirror but only on a partial segment.

Hi all, I''m working on a project that involves a tiered pricing structure for various features, all of which are accessed via a secure admin area. The features available in each tier, the tier structure and pricing will change over time, so new tier schemes will come into play, requiring feature/pricing schemes to be timestamped. I guess what I''m aiming for is

On 01/11/2023 02:09 AM, Simon Matter wrote: > What I usually do is this: "cut" the large disk into several pieces of > equal size and create individual RAID1 arrays. Then add them as LVM PVs to > one large VG. The advantage is that with one error on one disk, you wont > lose redundancy on the whole RAID mirror but only on a partial segment. > You can even lose another

Hi, I am using 2.6.36.3 kernel with btrfs, 512MB memory and a very slow disk, no special options for mounting btrfs except noatime. Now I found it very slow. When I rm a 5GB movie, it took 20 secs. -- 竹密岂妨流水过 山高哪阻野云飞 -- 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

Hi, All, We create a GlusterFS cluster with tiers. The hot tier is distributed-replicated SSDs. The cold tier is a n*(6+2) disperse volume. When copy millions of files to the cluster, we find these logs: W [socket.c:3292:socket_connect] 0-tierd: Ignore failed connection attempt on /var/run/gluster/39668fb028de4b1bb6f4880e7450c064.socket, (No such file or directory) W

I''m looking to try BTRFS on a SSD, and I would like to know what SSD optimizations it applies. Is there a comprehensive list of what ssd mount option does? How are the blocks and metadata arranged? Are there options available comparable to ext2/ext3 to help reduce wear and improve performance? Specifically, on ext2 (journal means more writes, so I don''t use ext3 on SSDs,