similar to: Rename BTRfs to MuchSlowerFS ?

Hi, I have 4 machines, all converted to BTRFS about 6 months ago, now all running Ubuntu Quantal with kernel 3.5.0-17 The matter is that all these machines are now getting slower and slower everyday, every disk access causing the disk to be 100% busy for long periods, to the point that I''m now seriously considering migrating everything back to ext4... From the start BTRFS was "not

Hi folks, I''m using Ubuntu 12.10 Quantal with # uname -r 3.5.0-24-generic And it seems I cannot defrag : # filefrag /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-24-generic /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-24-generic: 3 extents found # btrfs filesystem defrag /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-24-generic # echo $? 20 # filefrag /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-24-generic /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-24-generic: 3 extents found Any clue

As of the latest updates to anaconda and grub2 for Fedora 18, it is now possible to install with /boot as a btrfs subvolume. The way that grub2 is handling this is the "reach down" to the files it needs as if the subvolume was a directory. Is this OK? At this point I am not worried about snapshots or any other complexities. If the subvolume name is known. should grub2 be able to

Hi guys, After having received strong advice from the people in this list to upgrade my kernel to the latest one, I have installed 3.8.0-14-generic #24-Ubuntu SMP x86_64 on several (4) machines. In the hope of improving systems speed I had also removed all snapshots then defragged the FSes - the snapshots have been recreated since, as I use the excellent SuSE "Snapper" tool. But well,

Hi there, I have a system on which btrfsck gives the following output... I don''t understand the meaning of the reported errors, so any clue would be appreciated. Is this something I should worry about, or not ? Would I be advised to try "--repair" ? (Last time I tried this one, it completely b0rked a filesystem, beyond repair, and my wife would kill me ifever I trash this one,

Here is a small btrfs vs. ext4 benchmark with kernel 2.6.37-rc1. compilebench with options -i 10 -r 30 on 2.6.37-rc1 btrfs ========================================================================== intial create total runs 10 avg 73.11 MB/s (user 0.34s sys 1.96s) create total runs 5 avg 49.53 MB/s (user 0.41s sys 1.62s) patch total runs 4 avg 22.13 MB/s (user 0.09s sys 1.79s) compile total runs

Hi, I have btrfs volume, shared via samba. I have a directory of documents that I want to backup on my server. win7 reports a maximum of ~3.10MB/s transfer transferring the same directory on a ext4 samba share I get 25MB/s + Any ideas? Is it like that because of how btrfs works and is setup? Thanks, -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body

Hi, First, sorry if this isn''t the place to get this kind of help... If not, I appreciate some link , forum, where I can try get some answers... My problem: * Using btrfs + compression , flush of 60 MB/s take 4 minutes.... (on this 4 minutes they keep constatly I/O of +- 4MB/s no disks) (flush from Informix database) The enviroment : * Virtualized environment * OpenSuse 12.1 64bits,

I''m wondering is space really freed after deleting large subvolume? Will space be immediately available to other data like other subvolumes? -- 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

The inode eviction can be very slow, because during eviction we tell the VFS to truncate all of the inode''s pages. This results in calls to btrfs_invalidatepage() which in turn does calls to lock_extent_bits() and clear_extent_bit(). These calls result in too many merges and splits of extent_state structures, which consume a lot of time and cpu when the inode has many pages. In some

This idea is from ext4. By this patch, we can make the dio write parallel, and improve the performance. We needn''t worry about the race between dio write and truncate, because the truncate need wait untill all the dio write end. And we also needn''t worry about the race between dio write and punch hole, because we have extent lock to protect our operation. I ran fio to test the

We''ve been keeping around the inode sequence number in hopes that somebody would use it, but nobody uses it and people actually use i_version which serves the same purpose, so use i_version where we used the incore inode''s sequence number and that way the sequence is updated properly across the board, and not just in file write. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik

Hello guys, i try to convert ext4 volume, but btrfs-convert show me error: "No valid Btrfs found on file unable to open ctree conversion aborted." Ubuntu 13.04 Kernel: 3.11 btrfs-progs git version 0.20-git20130822~194aa4a13 way to reproduce error: $ truncate -s 4G file $ mkfs.ext4 file #say yes to create fs on non block device. $ btrfs-convert file No valid Btrfs found on file unable

In order to improve the performance of fsync, we use the outstanding ordered extents to avoid looking up the checksum from the csum tree. But we didn''t filter out the ordered extents whose csum is still being calculated, when we got those ordered extents, we had to wait for the csum calculation. It made the performance dropped down suddenly. (On my box, it drop down from 56MB/s to

Btrfs had some issues with fsync()''ing directories and fsync()''ing after renames. These three new tests cover the 3 different issues we were seeing. This breaks out the dmflakey stuff into a common helper to be shared between generic/311 and generic/321. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> --- V1->V2: rename test to generic/321 -removed an

On 06/21/2011 01:15 PM, Jan Stilow wrote: > Hello, > > Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek <at> gentoo.org> writes: >> [...] >> >> Every few minutes, (I guess) when applications do fsync (firefox, >> xchat, vim, etc), all applications that use fsync() hang for several >> seconds, and applications that use general IO suffer extreme >> slowdowns.

Hi list! I recently butchered my filesystem, and I was wondering if anyone knows how to help. Problem: My filesystem is screwed up, and I can''t mount it at all right now. In the logs, the problem begins around 45s. Background: I''m running a 6x4TB RAID5 array using md. I have a few virtual machines using said array, and one of them is a btrfs storage server. I ran into some

i am looking at using btrfs for a new project and i have a few questions:     * i have heard that as it currently stands Btrfs has some issues to be used as a Lustre file system; is he aware of the issues and any plans to address these and integrate Btrfs in to Lustre     * any plans to support native clustering on Btrfs     * on ZFS the ZIL is a separate device, any plans to implement a the

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

Hi, After reading through the btrfs documentation I''m curious to know if it''s possible to ever securely erase a file from a btrfs filesystem (or ZFS for that matter). On non-COW filesystems atop regular HDDs one can simply overwrite the file with zeros or random data using dd or some other tool and rest assured that the blocks which contained the sensitive information have