similar to: wrong values in "df" and "btrfs filesystem df"

Hallo, I''d like to get some explanations ... # btrfs filesystem show Label: ''MMedia'' uuid: 120b036a-883f-46aa-bd9a-cb6a1897c8d2 Total devices 3 FS bytes used 3.80TB devid 1 size 1.82TB used 1.29TB path /dev/sdg1 devid 3 size 1.81TB used 1.29TB path /dev/sdc1 devid 2 size 1.81TB used 1.28TB path /dev/sdb1 Btrfs Btrfs v0.19 # btrfs filesystem df /srv/MM

Hi folks! Been using btrfs for quite a while now, worked great until now. Got power-loss on my machine and now i have the "parent transid verify failed on X wanted X found X" problem. So I can''t get it to mount. My btrfs is spread over sda (2tb), sdc(2tb), sdd(1tb). Is this something that an offline fsck could fix ? If so is the fsck-util being developed ? Is there a way to

Hi! I recently tried to mount a filesystem in RAID1 mode using loopback devices. I followed the instructions at [1]. Here''s exactly what I''ve done: $ dd if=/dev/zero of=raid1_0.img bs=1M count=500 $ dd if=/dev/zero of=raid1_1.img bs=1M count=500 $ mkfs.btrfs -m raid1 -d raid1 raid1_0.img raid1_1.img $ losetup /dev/loop0 raid1_0.img $ losetup /dev/loop1 raid1_1.img $ mount -t

Hello, I am on Ubuntu Server 13.04 with Linux 3.8. I''ve created a "single-raid" using /dev/sd{a,b,c,d}{1,3}. One of my hard drives has failed, I mean it''s materially dead. :~$ sudo btrfs filesystem show Label: none uuid: 40886f51-8c9b-4be1-8721-83bf5653d2a0 Total devices 5 FS bytes used 226.90GB devid 4 size 37.27GB used 31.01GB path /dev/sdd1

Hi, I''m starting to play with btrfs on my new computer. I''m running Gentoo and have compiled the 2.6.31 kernel, enabling btrfs. Now I have 2 partitions (on 2 different sata disks) that are free for me to play with, each about 375 gb in size. I wanted to create a "raid1" volume using these two partitions, so I did: # mkfs.btrfs -d raid1 /dev/sda5 /dev/sdb5 # mount

Hi, My company is testing btrfs (kernel 2.6.38) on a slave MySQL database server with a 195Gb filesystem (of which about 123Gb is used). So far, we''re quite impressed with the performance. Our database loads are high, and if filesystem performance wasn''t good, MySQL replication wouldn''t be able to keep up and the slave latency would begin to climb. This though, is

Hallo, "never change a running system" ... For some months I run btrfs unter kernel 3.2.5 and 3.2.9, without problems. Yesterday I compiled kernel 3.3.4, and this morning I started the machine with this kernel. There may be some ugly problems. Copying something into the btrfs "directory" worked well for some files, and then I got error messages (I''ve not

I''ve had a go at determining exactly what happens when you create a filesystem without enough devices to meet the requested replication strategy: # mkfs.btrfs -m raid1 -d raid1 /dev/vdb # mount /dev/vdb /mnt # btrfs fi df /mnt Data: total=8.00MB, used=0.00 System, DUP: total=8.00MB, used=4.00KB System: total=4.00MB, used=0.00 Metadata, DUP: total=153.56MB, used=24.00KB Metadata:

Hi there... I have kernel version 2.6.36.3, compiled with gcc 4.4.5, btrfstools version 0.19+20101101 I have a btrfs filesystem (/data) consisting of two 1TB hard disks, raid0. I added in another 1TB hard drive. root@X86-64:~# btrfs filesystem show failed to read /dev/sdh failed to read /dev/sdg failed to read /dev/sdf failed to read /dev/sde failed to read /dev/sr0 failed to read /dev/fd0u800

Hi, I added a new drive to an existing RAID 0 array. Every attempt to rebalance the array fails: # btrfs filesystem balance /share/bd8 ERROR: error during balancing ''/share/bd8'' - Input/output error # dmesg | tail btrfs: found 1 extents btrfs: relocating block group 10752513540096 flags 1 btrfs: found 5 extents btrfs: found 5 extents btrfs: relocating block group 10751439798272

Hiya, Recently, a btrfs file system of mine started to behave very poorly with some btrfs kernel tasks taking 100% of CPU time. # btrfs fi show /dev/sdb Label: none uuid: b3ce8b16-970e-4ba8-b9d2-4c7de270d0f1 Total devices 3 FS bytes used 4.25TB devid 2 size 2.73TB used 1.52TB path /dev/sdc devid 1 size 2.70TB used 1.49TB path /dev/sda4 devid 3 size

Hi, thank you for your reply. I'll continue inline... Dne 09.09.2020 v 3:15 John Stoffel napsal(a): > Miloslav> Hello, > Miloslav> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: > Miloslav> "RAID-1 would be preferable" > Miloslav> (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). >

-----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

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

Hello, I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: "RAID-1 would be preferable" (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). May I ask you for the comments as from people around the Dovecot? We are using btrfs RAID-10 (/data, 4.7TB) on a physical Supermicro server with Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @

While untar''ing an image to an sd card via a reader, I got the following bug. The system also has a btrfs root, and a whole swath of processes went into uninterruptable sleep. I was able to poke around via ssh and sysrq, and already had netconsole set up to capture the bug. Root fs is on /dev/sdi1, and /dev/sdj2 is the card reader which was the target of the untar. [29571.448889] sd

Hi, I''m getting an error when trying to delete a device from a raid1 (data and metadata mirrored). > btrfs filesystem show failed to read /dev/sr0 Label: none uuid: 78b5162b-489e-4de1-a989-a47b91adef50 Total devices 2 FS bytes used 107.64GB devid 2 size 149.05GB used 109.01GB path /dev/sdh1 devid 1 size 156.81GB used 109.03GB path /dev/sdb6 Btrfs v0.20-rc1 >

Hello! I''m using ArchLinux with kernel Linux horus 3.10.5-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT. Mounting and unmounting takes a long time: # time mount -v /mnt/Archiv mount: /dev/sde1 mounted on /mnt/Archiv. mount -v /mnt/Archiv 0,00s user 0,16s system 1% cpu 9,493 total # sync && time umount -v /mnt/Archiv umount: /mnt/Archiv (/dev/sdd1) unmounted umount -v /mnt/Archiv 0,00s user

Observed on Linux 3.2.9 after the controller/disk flaked in-out. (The world still needs a SCSI error decoding tool to tell normal people what cmd and res are about.) [ 157.732885] device label srv devid 4 transid 11292 /dev/sdf [ 157.733201] btrfs: disk space caching is enabled [ 172.936515] device label srv devid 4 transid 11292 /dev/sdf [44106.091461] ata4.01: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0

Greetings, until yesterday I was running a btrfs filesystem across two 2.0 TiB disks in RAID1 mode for both metadata and data without any problems. As space was getting short I wanted to extend the filesystem by two additional drives lying around, which both are 1.0 TiB in size. Knowing little about the btrfs RAID implementation I thought I had to switch to RAID10 mode, which I was told is