similar to: kernel 3.3.4 damages filesystem (?)

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

Hallo, linux-btrfs, First I create an array of 2 disks with mkfs.btrfs -d raid0 -m raid1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdd1 and mount it at /srv/MM. Then I fill it with about 1,6 TByte. And then I add /dev/sde1 via btrfs device add /dev/sde1 /srv/MM btrfs filesystem balance /srv/MM (it run about 20 hours) Then I work on it, copy some new files, delete some old files - all works well. Only df

Hallo, linux-btrfs, please delete the option "-L" (for labelling) in "mkfs.btrfs", in some configurations it doesn''t work as expected. My usual way: mkfs.btrfs -d raid0 -m raid1 /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sdd ... One call for some devices. Wenn I add the option "-L mylabel" then each device gets the same label, and therefore some other programs

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

Hello If I want to manage a complete disk with btrfs, what''s the "Best Practice"? Would it be best to create the btrfs filesystem on "/dev/sdb", or would it be better to create just one partition from start to end and then do "mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb1"? Would the same recomendation hold true, if we''re talking about huge disks, like 4TB or so?

I''ve just pushed out a new integration branch to my git repo. This is purely bugfix patches -- there are no new features in this issue of the integration branch. I''ve got a stack of about a dozen more patches with new features in them still to go. I''ll be working on those tomorrow. As always, there''s minimal testing involved here, but it does at least compile on

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

Hi, My xen guest stopped booting suddenly and giving me the below error message. Any idea what is going wrong here? DOM 0 boots OK though. ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1 SErr 0x0 action 0x0 ata5.00: irq_stat 0x40000008 ata5.00: failed command: READ FPDMA QUEUED ata5.00: cmd 60/00:00:cd:ee:36/02:00:09:00:00/40 tag 0 ncq 262144 in res 51/40:72:5b:f0:36/d9:00:09:00:00/40 Emask

Hi, My xen guest stopped booting suddenly and giving me the below error message. Any idea what is going wrong here? DOM 0 boots OK though. ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1 SErr 0x0 action 0x0 ata5.00: irq_stat 0x40000008 ata5.00: failed command: READ FPDMA QUEUED ata5.00: cmd 60/00:00:cd:ee:36/02:00:09:00:00/40 tag 0 ncq 262144 in res 51/40:72:5b:f0:36/d9:00:09:00:00/40 Emask

Just compiled a custom kernel, but unable to mount a btrfs partition. It essentially says ''unrecognized filesystem''. What could be missing? # File systems # CONFIG_EXT2_FS=y CONFIG_EXT2_FS_XATTR=y CONFIG_EXT2_FS_POSIX_ACL=y CONFIG_EXT2_FS_SECURITY=y # CONFIG_EXT2_FS_XIP is not set CONFIG_EXT3_FS=y CONFIG_EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED=y CONFIG_EXT3_FS_XATTR=y

If there is no free space, the free space allocator will try to get space from the block group with the degenerated profile. For example, if there is no free space in the RAID1 block groups, the allocator will try to allocate space from the DUP block groups. And besides that, the space reservation has the similar behaviour: if there is no enough space in the space cache to reserve, it will reserve

Hallo, linux-btrfs, I can''t switch a running "btrfs filesystem balance ..." via ctrl z bg into the background, with other jobs this way works. The stopping command "ctrl z" doesn''t work. (may be on other keyboards it''s "ctrl y") What goes wrong? Viele Gruesse! Helmut -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Hallo, linux-btrfs, I''m working with btrfs for some days. btrfs-progs-20101101, kernel 2.6.35.8 (both self compiled). First step: mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdd1 mount /dev/sdd1 /srv/MM for a 2 TByte partition, worked well. Copying about 1,5 TByte data to this partition worked well. Second step: btrfs device add /dev/sdc1 /srv/MM btrfs filesystem balance

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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I''ve been unable to find anything definitive about what happens if I use RAID0 to join an SSD and HDD together with respect to performance (latency, throughput). The future is obvious (hot data tracking, using most appropriate device for the data, data migration). In my specific case I have a 250GB SSD and a 500GB HDD, and about 250GB of

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

Hallo, Jeremy, Du meintest am 12.01.16: >>> Run under gdb please and type "bt" to get a backtrace when >>> it crashes. [...] >> [?1034h(gdb) run >> Starting program: /usr/bin/smbclient >> [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] >> Using host libthread_db library "/lib/libthread_db.so.1". >> >> Program received

Hi, I wanted to create a new btrfs fs for my backups. When trying to mkfs.btrfs for that device, I''m getting "error checking /dev/loop2 mount status" With strace I see where the problem is: lstat("/dev/disk/by-id/ata-INTEL_SSDSA2M160G2GC_CVPO939201JX160AGN-par", 0x7fffa30b3cf0) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) The problem is there is something missing

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Is it ( yet? ) possible to manipulate the allocation policy on a subvolume level instead of the fs level? For example, to make / use raid1, and /home use raid0? Or to have / allocated from an ssd and /home allocated from the giant 2tb hd. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -

Hi, i have some questions when using Btrfs on multi-devices: 1. a large file will always be stored wholely on a device or it may spread on some devices/partitions? Btrfs has option to specify it explicitly? 2. suppose i have a directory tree like that: Dir_1  |--> file_1A  |--> file_1B  |--> Dir_2          |--> file_2C          |--> file_2D If Dir_2, file_2C  on a failed device,