search for: baroncelli

...t possible to recursively snapshot a subvolume in read-only mode This because when a subvolume is snapshotted, its nested subvolumes appear as directory in the snapshot. These directories are removed before snapshotting the nested subvolumes. This is incompatible with a read only subvolume. BR G.Baroncelli -- 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 Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli <kreijack@gmail.com> wrote: >       filesystem resize [+/-]<size>[gkm]|max <filesystem> -filesystem resize [+/-]<size>[gkm]|max <filesystem> +filesystem resize [+/-]<size>[gkm]|max <dev> This command works on devices, not paths. >              Resi...

I''ve filed this bug under util-linux, because I think wipefs isn''t deleting all btrfs metadata it could. But ultimately it appears to be a btrfs bug because nothing else sees the stale volume. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889888#c15 btrfs-progs-0.20.rc1.20121017git92d9eec-1.fc18.x86_64 e2fs-progs-1.42.5-1.fc18.x86_64 kernel 3.7.1-2 Brand new 80GB virtual disk,

Hi, I''m hitting this issue - sda5 is a normal device, nothing to do with loop, encryption etc. # mkfs.btrfs /dev/sda5 WARNING! - Btrfs v0.19-35-g1b444cd-dirty IS EXPERIMENTAL WARNING! - see http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org before using error checking /dev/sda5 mount status Is there something I can do to resolve this? Thank you Lubos -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Hello, This is the second attempt to bring in cross subvolume reflinks into btrfs. The first attempt was NAKed due to missing vfs mount checks and a clear description of what btrfs subvolumes are and probably also why cross subvolume reflinks are ok in the case of btrfs. This version of the patch comes from David and is in SUSE kernels since a long time, so it is tested and working. The patch

Hi I''ve made some updates on the wiki and I''d like a technical review for correctness. This particular topic is already confusing - some unnecessary sarcasm made it even more so: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ#Why_does_df_show_incorrect_free_space_for_my_RAID_volume.3F Due to the terms "used" and "allocated" in the wiki, viric in #btrfs made

...on has the sync disabled For the second point I am looking a way to enable the libeatmydata only for the dpkg program. I found that it is possible to pass --force-unsafe-io to dpkg in order to reduce the sync calls. But it seems that some sync are anyway performed. Comments are welcome. BR G.Baroncelli ------------------------------------------- $ cat btrfs-aptitude #!/bin/bash ROLLBACK=/var/btrfs/__rollback ACTIVE=/var/btrfs/__active if [ ! -d "$ACTIVE" ]; then echo "Cannot find $ACTIVE" exit fi if [ -d "$ROLLBACK" ]; then echo "Fou...

Hello all, in IRC we had a discussion on how we could solve sending live subvolumes and how to send subvolumes without the need to administrate/keep old snapshots for incremental sends. One of the ideas was to introduce "sendshots", which are basically snapshots where no refs are counted for file data. This means, that when file data is changed in the sendshot origin, we do not consume

....00MB Metadata,RAID1: Size:460.94MB, Used:24.00KB /dev/vdb 460.94MB /dev/vdd 460.94MB Metadata,Single: Size:8.00MB, Used:0.00 /dev/vdb 8.00MB Unused: /dev/vdb 2.23GB /dev/vdc 2.69GB /dev/vdd 2.24GB - -- gpg @keyserver.linux.it: Goffredo Baroncelli (kreijackATinwind.it> Key fingerprint BBF5 1610 0B64 DAC6 5F7D 17B2 0EDA 9B37 8B82 E0B5 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQiZFRAAoJEA7amzeLguC1v6QQAIk22PRdfXJJZC3Jq0zugQrg e+4N2FZXDrLt...

This is the source code of the man page of btrfs. The main changes from my previous patch are: - Rearranged the short command in order to avoid conflicts - Renamed the ''create'' verb is ''subvolume'' Thanks to Daniel for some tweaks on the syntax BR G.Baroncelli diff --git a/man/Makefile b/man/Makefile index 4e8893b..4a90b75 100644 --- a/man/Makefile +++ b/man/Makefile @@ -7,13 +7,16 @@ mandir = $(prefix)/man man8dir = $(mandir)/man8 MANPAGES = mkfs.btrfs.8.gz btrfsctl.8.gz btrfsck.8.gz btrfs-image.8.gz \ - btrfs-show.8.gz + btrfs-show.8.gz btrf...

...m carefully. NOTE: I tested these scripts which an ubuntu 10.4 system. I don''t know the changes which may be required to work for other distributions (like fedora), but I am very interested in knowing those. Comments are welcome. BR Goffredo -- gpg key@ keyserver.linux.it: Goffredo Baroncelli (ghigo) <kreijackATinwind.it> Key fingerprint = 4769 7E51 5293 D36C 814E C054 BF04 F161 3DC5 0512 -- 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...

Can anybody tell me if quota information is journaled ? After bad-shutdown the quota info is correctly or I need run quotacheck ?

...-f core $(CLEANFILES) $(OBJS) .*.d *.g The problema was an unmatched tab between the '#define' and the 'ARITH_xxxx' macro. But I don't know if the syntax [:space:] is supported on all system where the klib should compile. Goffredo -- gpg key@ keyserver.linux.it: Goffredo Baroncelli (ghigo) <kreijack@inwind.it> Key fingerprint = CE3C 7E01 6782 30A3 5B87 87C0 BB86 505C 6B2A CFF9

...in /proc/mount the info about which subvolume is mounted and which metadata_ratio value is used. $ cat /proc/mounts rootfs / rootfs rw 0 0 [...] /dev/sdc /tmp/t4 btrfs rw,relatime,metadata_ratio=20 0 0 /dev/sdc /mnt/btrfs btrfs rw,relatime,degraded,metadata_ratio=20,subvol=snap- of-root 0 0 BR G.Baroncelli commit 3d7ea7bbd70a66c4d0f369b2879c503b722e8834 Author: ghigo <ghigo@kreijack.homelinux.net> Date: Thu Jan 14 20:27:41 2010 +0100 Add info about metadata_ratio and subvolume name diff --git a/fs/btrfs/super.c b/fs/btrfs/super.c index 3f9b457..faeaa7f 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/super.c +++...

Hi Li, >----Messaggio originale---- >Da: lizf@cn.fujitsu.com >Data: 30/11/2010 8.03 >A: <kreijack@libero.it> >Cc: <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org> >Ogg: Re: [PATCH 5/5] btrfs: Add ioctl to set snapshot readonly/writable > >Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: >> Hi Li, >> >> On Monday, 29 November, 2010, Li Zefan wrote: >>> This allows us to set a snapshot readonly or writable on the fly. >>> >>> Usage: >>> >>> Set BTRFS_SNAPSHOT_RDONLY/WRITABLE of btrfs_ioctl_vol_arg_v2->flags, &...

Fedora provides yum-fs-snapshot. If installed, on each package installation or update a snapshot of all btrfs filesystems is taken, so it is possible to revert the installation/update. Suppose an update failed and I want to get back: with # btrfs subvolume set-default yum-snapshot-whatever / I define which snapshot to use at the next boot. After rebooting I decide I really want to stay with

Did something break.. ? we are not reporting raid type after balance. ----------- # btrfs fi df /btrfs Data, RAID0: total=2.00GB, used=2.03MB Data: total=8.00MB, used=0.00 System, RAID0: total=16.00MB, used=4.00KB System: total=4.00MB, used=0.00 Metadata, RAID0: total=2.00GB, used=216.00KB Metadata: total=8.00MB, used=4.00KB # btrfs bal /btrfs Done, had to relocate 5 out of 5 chunks # btrfs fi

...old code untouched, and I added another IOCTL, putting a warning in the old one. If we accept to break the binary compatibility we can reuse the old IOCTL. This patch is complementary to the Li Zefan ones [1], so for the best correctness both have to be applied. Comments are welcome Regards G.Baroncelli diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c index f87552a..52075ed 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c @@ -1134,11 +1134,11 @@ advance_key: if (key->offset < (u64)-1 && key->offset < sk->max_offset) key->offset++; else if (key->type < (u...

Thanks for the quick reply! But I still have problems with btrfsctl: > stat /dev/btrfs-control File: `/dev/btrfs-control'' Size: 0 Blocks: 0 IO Block: 4096 block special file Device: ch/12d Inode: 659848 Links: 1 Device type: a,3e Access: (0644/brw-r--r--) Uid: ( 0/ root) Gid: ( 0/ root) Access: 2010-01-09 11:31:15.757979602 +0100

Hi, using btrfs with LVM snapshots seems to be confusing /proc/mounts After mounting a snapshot of an original filesystem, the devicename of the original filesystem is overwritten with that of the snapshot in /proc/mounts. Steps to reproduce: arnd@kallisto:/mnt$ sudo mount /dev/vg0/original /mnt/original [ 107.041432] device fsid 5c3e8ca2-da56-4ade-9fef-103a6a8a70c2 devid 1 transid 4