similar to: Number of hard links limit

Hi, I am using btrfs for remote backups (via rsync), with daily and weekly snapshots. I see these messages in kern.log: Jul 18 07:09:43 backup1 kernel: [3437126.458374] btrfs: unlinked 9 orphans Jul 18 12:01:01 backup1 kernel: [3454604.905856] btrfs: unlinked 1 orphans Jul 18 13:01:51 backup1 kernel: [3458254.990199] btrfs: unlinked 1 orphans Jul 19 04:01:41 backup1 kernel: [3512244.236347]

Hello! Long time ago I created btrfs on /dev/sda After some changes btrfs moved to /dev/sda1 (well, to md, and sda1 is part of md). As result, <btrfs fi show> show me 2 filesystems: new one and old one. Probably I need to do some cleaning. Can someone tell me what to do. fdisk -u -c -l /dev/sda Disk /dev/sda: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes 81 heads, 63 sectors/track, 765633 cylinders,

I realise that the hard link limit is in the queue to fix, and I read the recent thread as well as the older (october I think) thread. I just wanted to note that BackupPC *does* in fact run into the hard link limit, and its due to the dpkg configuration scripts. BackupPC hard links files with the same content together by scanning new files and linking them together, whether or not they started

I thought I would try btrfs on a new installation of f14. yes, I know its experimental but stable so it seemed to be a good time to try it. I am not sure if I have missed something out of all my searching but am I correct in thinking that currently: I. it is not possible to boot from a snapshot of the operating system and, in particular, the yum snapshots cannot be used for

Not sure if it''s anything interesting - I had the following entry in dmesg a few days ago, on a server with 32 GB RAM. The system is still working fine. [1878432.675210] btrfs-qgroup-re: page allocation failure: order:5, mode:0x104050 [1878432.675319] CPU: 5 PID: 22251 Comm: btrfs-qgroup-re Not tainted 3.11.0-rc7 #2 [1878432.675417] Hardware name: System manufacturer System Product

I''m a little concerned about the size of my metadata. I''m doing raid10 on both data and metadata, and: hrm@vlad:mnt $ sudo btrfs fi df /mnt Data: total=488.01GB, used=487.23GB Metadata: total=3.01GB, used=677.73MB System: total=11.88MB, used=52.00KB hrm@vlad:mnt $ find /mnt | wc -l 20137 By my calculations, that''s something on the order of 17.5K per filesystem

Dear R-help group, I have a dataset with daily closing prices from a stock exchange (consecutive 5 trading days) from a firm trading a specific commodity. The date variable looks like: quote_date 20080411 With the format; yyyymmdd. Moreover, I have another data set with a (average) weekly price of the underlying commodity. The date variables in this dataset are only year and a week number. I

Hey, I''ve a 2x4TB RAID1 setup with btrfs on kernel 3.8.0. Under high I/O load (BackupPC dump or writing a large file over gigabit) I get messages in syslog such as the one mentioned in the subject. The full non-logcheck-ignored log is under [1]. A BackupPC dump between the same exact machines onto a 2TB ext4 volume take 90 minutes on average, the process on the btrfs volume took 465

On 2020-02-24 14:37, lejeczek via CentOS wrote: > > > On 24/02/2020 10:26, Roberto Ragusa wrote: >> On 2020-02-24 10:51, lejeczek via CentOS wrote: >>> g) remember!! still at least (depending how you mount it) >>> the 'root' will have access to that data while mounted, >>> obviously! >> >> More than that: the root user will be able to

On 2020-02-24 10:51, lejeczek via CentOS wrote: > g) remember!! still at least (depending how you mount it) > the 'root' will have access to that data while mounted, > obviously! More than that: the root user will be able to access data in the future too, since it can steal the key while the data is mounted. Regards. -- Roberto Ragusa mail at robertoragusa.it

Hi all! I'm building a raid box to use for backups, connectivity will be either USB3 or esata. Looking for suggestions on backup software I can use. I know there's rsync, which may be a good solution. I also find backupPC at epel, backintime also at epel, kbackup. DejaDup looks interesting, but none of the repos I'm set up to use shows it being available. some small details: I

On 2020-02-24 15:57, H wrote: > On 02/24/2020 12:42 PM, Roberto Ragusa wrote: >> On 2020-02-24 14:37, lejeczek via CentOS wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 24/02/2020 10:26, Roberto Ragusa wrote: >>>> On 2020-02-24 10:51, lejeczek via CentOS wrote: >>>>> g) remember!! still at least (depending how you mount it) >>>>> the

My manager just tasked me at looking at this, for one team we're supporting. Now, he'd been thinking of bacula, but I see their Windows binaries are now not-free, so I'm looking around. IIRC, Les thinks highly of backuppc; comments on that, or other packaged solutions? mark

I have two machines a linux_amd64_x86 (gentoo_amd64) and a linux_x86. Both run R-2.1.0. I have a very long program (hopefully will become a package) that works perfectly on the linux_amd_x64. Great means no error, no problems and results that, where the analytic solution exists, coincide with it. I have problem making the code run on the x64 machine. I am baffled. The same code on the same version

When I try to start BackupPC with "sudo systemctl restart backuppc" on my CentOS-7 server (running kernel 3.10.0-229.14.1.el7.x86_64) I get the following error in /var/log/BackupPC/LOG 2015-09-26 13:58:14 Reading hosts file 2015-09-26 13:58:14 unix bind() failed: No such file or directory This message occurs in the Perl script /usr/share/BackupPC/bin/BackupPC : my $sockFile

I'd be interested in any corrections or comments on the following instructions (basically for myself): We assume that BackupPC has been installed: sudo yum install BackupPC 1. BackupPC must be run by the user backuppc. Accordingly the lines User apache Group apache in /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf should be changed to User backuppc Group backuppc 2. The user backuppc must be able to

For some time now i have been running BackupPC 3.1.0 on CentOS 5.1 x86_64 however after upgrading to CentOS 5.2 BackupPC will not start. "sudo /etc/init.d/backuppc start" return OK but there is no BackupPC processes. This fails also. # sudo -u backuppc /usr/bin/BackupPC -d # echo $? 0 This succeeds, but of course does not fork. # sudo -u backuppc /usr/bin/BackupPC So for some

On 09/13/2015 03:48 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote: > Timothy Murphy wrote: > >> I thought I'd write a 1-page note to myself of the steps I took, >> in preparation for CentOS-8... >> I have a couple of questions that this raises. >> >> 1. Why exactly does backuppc want to ssh to root? >> Is this just a way of running BackupPC as root? >> >> 2.

I recently moved BackupPC from CentOS-6 to CentOS-7. But when I browse to localhost/BackupPC I'm told Error: Wrong user: my userid is 48[apache], instead of 984(backuppc) As far as I can tell, the BackupPC settings are exactly the same as they were before the move. It seems htttpd is running the program as user apache rather than backuppc, as required. Is there a simple setting in

I finally got BackupPC working under Centos-7.1 after several hours of pain. I had been running it for several years under CentOS-6, and probably CentOS-5, but there seem to me to have been several new issues that arise with CentOS-7. In my experience, the official documentation on this, <http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html>, is more or less useless unless you have a very long