similar to: make snapshot main volume, delete all others?

Currently the resize command is under filesystem, and takes a path to the mounted filesystem. This seems wrong to me. Shouldn''t it be under device, and take a path to a device to resize? Otherwise, how can a resize operation when you have multiple devices make any sense? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to

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

Add a mount option user_subvol_rm_allowed that allows users to delete a (potentially non-empty!) subvol when they would otherwise we allowed to do an rmdir(2). We duplicate the may_delete() checks from the core VFS code to implement identical security checks (minus the directory size check). Signed-off-by: Sage Weil <sage@newdream.net> --- fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 1 + fs/btrfs/ioctl.c |

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. >              Resize a filesystem identified by <path>.  The

Hi, Let me know if this is the wrong place to ask... I''m using Fedora 12 x86_64, mostly with the newer 21.6.32 kernel, and have a single btrfs filesystem within a 120Gb partition. I''d like to extend the space btrfs can use. One option is presumably add a new device to btrfs, but I was hoping to simple resize the existing partition to say 160Gb. With ext4 I might do

- Add incompat flag, otherwise btrfs-progs will report error when operating on btrfs filesystems mounted with lzo option. - Allow to turn on lzo compression for defrag operation: # btrfs filesystem defragment -c[zlib, lzo] <file> Note: "-c zlib" will fail, because that''s how getopt() works for optional arguments. Signed-off-by: Li Zefan

Hi Anthony, I think that for you may be interested to read this thread http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-btrfs/2009/11/20/6588643/thread and to read a my blog about this argument http://kreijack.blogspot.com/2010/01/linux-btrfs-example-of-layout.html Regards Goffredo >----Messaggio originale---- >Da: anthony@extof.me >Data: 19/05/2010 8.50 >A:

Hi, I just read this blog article from austrian Linux expert Michael Kofler. For those among you who don't know the guy, he's my home country's number one Linux expert (known as "der Kofler") and most notably the author of a series of excellent books about Linux over the last 25 years. https://kofler.info/centos-8-wertlose-langzeitunterstuetzung/ Disclaimer : I've been

The goal is to detect when drives start to get an increased error rate, when drives should be replaced soon. Therefore statistic counters are added that count IO errors (read, write and flush). Additionally, the software detected errors like checksum errors and corrupted blocks are counted. An ioctl interface is added to get the device statistic counters. A second ioctl is added to atomically get

This was a request from the systemd guys. They need a quick and easy way to get all devices attached to a Btrfs filesystem in order to check if any of the disks are SSD for...something, I didn''t ask :). I''ve tested this with the btrfs-progs patch that accompanies this patch. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com> --- fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 64

On 6/17/20 8:06 AM, Simon Matter via CentOS wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I just read this blog article from austrian Linux expert Michael Kofler. >> For >> those among you who don't know the guy, he's my home country's number one >> Linux >> expert (known as "der Kofler") and most notably the author of a series of >> excellent books

Hi All, the following patches implement the recursively snapshotting and deleting of a subvolume. To snapshot recursively you must pass the -R switch: # btrfs subvolume create sub1 Create subvolume ''./sub1'' # btrfs subvolume create sub1/sub2 Create subvolume ''sub1/sub2'' # btrfs subvolume snapshot -R sub1 sub1-snap Create a snapshot of

Hi, I have been a happy user of CentOS 7 in the past. I am now considering switching to CentOS 8. However, since end of Oct. 2019, I have not received any updates on my CentOS 8 test installations. Since then, RHEL 8 has published several critical security updates. Obviously, this make the use of CentOS 8 in production dangerous. I guess the missing updates have to to with RHEL version 8.1,

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

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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, this is a new attempt to improve the output of the command "btrfs fi df". The previous attempt received a good reception. However there was no a general consensus about the wording. Moreover I still didn''t understand how btrfs was using the disks. A my first attempt was to develop a new command which shows how the disks

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