similar to: BTRFS RAID

Hi all, I have two multi-disk btrfs filesystems on a Arch linux 3.4.0 system. After a power failure, both filesystems refuse to mount [ 10.402284] Btrfs loaded [ 10.402714] device fsid 1e7c18a4-02d6-44b1-8eaf-c01378009cd3 devid 4 transid 65282 /dev/sdc [ 10.403108] btrfs: force zlib compression [ 10.403130] btrfs: enabling inode map caching [ 10.403152] btrfs: disk space caching is

Hello, I''ve got a quick question: Does btrfs adapt to size changes of the underlying block device(s)? My specific situation is as follows: I''ve got a luks-volume on which I want to put btrfs. If this luks-volume grows in the future (i.e. by ''cryptsetup resize''), will btrfs automatically (and reliably) "see" this and be able to use the additional

On 2017-02-15, John R Pierce <pierce at hogranch.com> wrote: > On 2/14/2017 4:48 PM, tdukes at palmettoshopper.com wrote: > >> 3 - Can additional drive(s) be added later with a changein RAID level >> without current data loss? > > Only some systems support that sort of restriping, and its a dangerous > activity (if the power fails or system crashes midway through

Hello all, Is there any patches for btrfs to use enhanced area in eMMC (it will allow to boost performance i.e. it very useful to keep metadata within this area) ? If it''s exist let me know how to find it and use it. Thanks, -- 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

Hi all, below a configuration for udev/initramfs which I propose to scan the block devices looking for a multi-volume btrfs filesystem. Btrfs has the capability to span a file-system on multiple device. In order to do that, the involved devices have to be "registered" in the kernel. In order to do that there are two options: # btrfs device scan <device> (or the old

For using SSDs: Are there any format/mount parameters that should be set for using btrfs on SSDs (other than the "ssd" mount option)? General questions: How long is the ''delay'' for the delayed alloc? Are file allocations aligned to 4kiB boundaries, or larger? What byte value is used to pad unused space? (Aside: For some, the erased state reads all 0x00, and for

Hello, Just a couple questions regarding RAID. Here's thesituation. I bought a 4TB drive before I upgraded from 6.8 to 7.3. I'm not too far into this that Ican't start over. I wanted disk space to backup 3 other machines. I way overestimated what I needed for full, incremental and image backups with UrBackup.I've used less than 1TB so far. I would like to add an additional drive

Hello, btrfs is failing to mount if I use the mount option acl. I am running debian testing with a debian experimental version of kernel 3.7.3: uname -a Linux nimby 3.7-trunk-486 #1 Debian 3.7.3-1~experimental.1 i686 GNU/Linux from fstab LABEL=btrfs-exthd /mnt/exthd btrfs defaults,noatime,compress=zlib,acl 0 2 from dmesg [ 14.785716] device label btrfs-exthd devid 1 transid

What happened to the hot data tracking feature in btrfs? There are a lot of old patches from aug 2010, but it looks like the feature has been completly removed from the current version of btrfs. Is this feature still on the roadmap?

If we''ve abandoned the idea of putting the number of redundant blocks into the top bits of the type bitmask (and I hope we have), then we''re fairly much there. Current code is at: git://, http://git.infradead.org/users/dwmw2/btrfs-raid56.git git://, http://git.infradead.org/users/dwmw2/btrfs-progs-raid56.git We have recovery working, as well as both full-stripe writes

Hi list, I am using kernel 3.9.0, btrfs-progs 0.20-rc1-253-g7854c8b. I have a three disk array of level single: # btrfs fi sh Label: none uuid: 2e905f8f-e525-4114-afa6-cce48f77b629 Total devices 3 FS bytes used 3.80TB devid 1 size 2.73TB used 2.25TB path /dev/sdd devid 2 size 2.73TB used 1.55TB path /dev/sdc devid 3 size 2.73TB used 0.00 path /dev/sdb

Hiya, is there any recommendation out there to setup a btrfs FS on top of hardware or software raid5 or raid6 wrt stripe/stride alignment? From mkfs.btrfs, it doesn''t look like there''s much that can be adjusted that would help, and what I''m asking might not even make sense for btrfs but I thought I''d just ask. Thanks, Stephane -- To unsubscribe from this

Hello, I added a new disk into our RAID5 array, it looks like this: md2 : active raid5 sdd4[3] sde4[4] sda4[0] sdc4[2] sdb4[1] 3767274240 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/5] [UUUUU] # btrfs fi sh Label: none uuid: 5534d2e7-be31-49c7-8ab7-90c5ab8afe18 Total devices 1 FS bytes used 2.24TB devid 3 size 2.63TB used 2.63TB path /dev/md2 # mount ... /dev/md2 on /home type btrfs

Hello all: I have two machines with btrfs, that give me the "blocked for more than 120 seconds" message. After that I cannot write anything to disk, i am unable to unmount the btrfs filesystem and i can only reboot with sysrq-trigger. It always happens when i write many files with rsync over network. When i used 3.2rc6 it happened randomly on both machines after 50-500gb of writes.

We discussed using the top bits of the chunk type field field to store a number of redundant disks -- so instead of RAID5, RAID6, etc., we end up with a single ''RAID56'' flag, and the amount of redundancy is stored elsewhere. This attempts it, but I hate it and don''t really want to do it. The type field is designed as a bitmask, and _used_ as a bitmask in a number of

First off, thanks for an awesome file system, it is working well for my purposes of compressing a filesystem on a small VPS. Woot! I thought I''d call out a few things (in the hopes of spurring improvements) I''d seen about btrfs (in case they weren''t common knowledge...):

Hi everyone, I''ve updated the master branch with the pending stable btrfs-progs commit that should make the 0.20 release. Thanks to Hugh for helping to queue up a few of them. We''ll have more frequent releases from here as we pull in the major new features going into progs (raid5/6, send/receive, quotas, fsck improvements). Please give it a shot and let me know if you see any

Hello all. What we have: SL6 - kernel 2.6.32-131.2.1.el6.x86_64 btrfs on mdadm RAID5 with 8 HDD - 27T partition. I see this at top: 1182 root 20 0 0 0 0 R 100.0 0.0 16:39.73 [btrfs-delalloc-] And LA is grow. What is this and how can I fix it? -- Best regards, Proskurin Kirill -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of

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

Hi all. I was doing some testing with writing out data to a BTFS filesystem with the compress-force option. With 1 program running, I saw btfs-delalloc taking about 1 CPU worth of time, much as could be expected. I then started up 2 programs at the same time, writing data to the BTRFS volume. btrfs-delalloc still only used 1 CPU worth of time. Is btrfs-delalloc threaded, to where it can use