similar to: raw partition or LV for btrfs?

Hi, I planned to boost my btrfs performance today. here some errors I met: my ''btrfs filesystem show'' result: ~ # btrfs filesystem show failed to read /dev/sr0 Label: none uuid: 9b9aa9d9-760e-445c-a0ab-68e102d9f02e Total devices 1 FS bytes used 36.59GB devid 1 size 49.52GB used 49.52GB path /dev/sda6 Label: none uuid: 559dec06-4fd0-47c1-97b8-cc4fa6153fa0

From: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> (This patch is for the review/test not yet for the integration). Here is an implementation of the feature to add label to the subvolume and snapshots. Which would help sysadmin to better manager the subvol and snapshots. This can be done in two ways, one - using attr which is user land only changes but drawback is able to change the label

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Calvin Walton <calvin.walton@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 03:30 +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> I use btrfs on most of my volumes on my laptop, and I''ve always felt >> booting was very slow, but definitely sure is slow, is starting up >> Google Chrome: >> >> encrypted ext4: ~20s >> btrfs: ~2:11s

Hello, We are using btrfs filesystems in our infrastructure and, at some point of time, they start refusing to create new subvolumes. Each file system is being quota initialized immediately after its creation (with "btrfs quota enable") and then all subfolders under the root directory are created as subvolumes (btrfs subvolume create). Over time, these subvolumes may also be

I''ve been thinking about this for a while, from a perspective of how to make it work by allocating i-node numbers from a global pool, but yesterday I realized that offering the feature would be a bad idea because it violates the semantics of file systems. I will be happy to expand on that point if anyone disagrees with it. dln -- "It is merely a matter of persistence." --

Hi everybody, I am using btrfs as my main fs for some time now, but I am experiencing severe performance drawbacks. I can''t qualify the circumstances, but sometimes during disc access the whole system freezes for some time. Maybe somebody could suggest some general things I could try to search for the problem? Thanks in advance, Florian --- Some background information: $ mount |

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

I''m currently researching an upgrade to (raid1-ed) btrfs from mostly reiserfs (which I''ve found quite reliable (even thru a period of bad ram and resulting system crashes) since data=ordered went in with 2.6.16 or whatever it was. (Thanks, Chris! =:^)) on multiple md/raid-1s. I have some questions that don''t appear to be addressed well on the wiki, yet, or where

I thought I would try btrfs on a new installation of f14. yes, I know its experimental but stable so it seemed to be a good time to try it. I am not sure if I have missed something out of all my searching but am I correct in thinking that currently: I. it is not possible to boot from a snapshot of the operating system and, in particular, the yum snapshots cannot be used for

Hi all, i am new on btrfs, i am testing KVM on btrfs (host: kernel x86-64 3.5.3), the performance is reasonable. I have two question on defrag, can someone help me? 1. According to btrfs wiki, defragment a COW file will produce two unrelated files. Does it apply to the "autodefrag" mount option? 2. Is there any command for the fragmentation status of a file/dir ? e.g. fragment

Not sure if it''s anything interesting - I had the following entry in dmesg a few days ago, on a server with 32 GB RAM. The system is still working fine. [1878432.675210] btrfs-qgroup-re: page allocation failure: order:5, mode:0x104050 [1878432.675319] CPU: 5 PID: 22251 Comm: btrfs-qgroup-re Not tainted 3.11.0-rc7 #2 [1878432.675417] Hardware name: System manufacturer System Product

-----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

- 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

Is it expected that running btrfsck more than once will keep reporting errors? Below is the end of a btrfsck output when run the second time. backpointer mismatch on [111942471680 32768] owner ref check failed [111942471680 32768] ref mismatch on [111942504448 40960] extent item 1, found 0 Incorrect local backref count on 111942504448 root 5 owner 160739 offset 3440640 found 0 wanted 1 back

Creating a btrfs file system using btrfs-progs-0.20.rc1.20130308git704a08c-1.fc19, and either kernel 3.6.10-4.fc18 or 3.9.0-0.rc3.git0.3.fc19, makes a file system that cannot be mounted by kernel 3.6.10-4.fc18. It can be mounted by kernel 3.8.4. I haven''t tested any other 3.8, or any 3.7 kernels. Is this expected? dmesg reports: [ 300.014764] btrfs: disk space caching is enabled [

Welcome, I''ve been using btrfs for over a 3 months to store my personal data on my NAS server. Almost all interactions with files on the server are done using unison synchronizer. After another use of bedup (https://github.com/g2p/bedup) on my btrfs volume I experienced huge perfomance loss with synchronization. It now takes over 3 hours what have taken only 15 minutes! File

Hi all, Just a quick question but can''t find an obvious answer. Can I create/convert a existing (btrfs) directory into a subvolume? It would be very helpful when transferring ''partitions'' into btrfs. I found a similar question way back in google, but that site is down now generally. Thanks in advance. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

This is a first draft of a subvolume quota implementation. It is possible to limit subvolumes and any group of subvolumes and also to track the amount of space that will get freed when deleting snapshots. The current version is functionally incomplete, with the main missing feature being the initial scan and rescan of an existing filesystem. I put some effort into writing an introduction into

I just setup a new SSD with my laptop root filesystem, and at the time I though, "eh, I''ll just use zlib compression during the first copy, and then switch to lzo afterwards to maintain write speed when I''m using the laptop after the copy and reboot". Now, I rebooted with the new ssd and zlib compressed rootfs, and it seemed to boot slower than it did before with the

Very low priority. No user data at risk. 8GB virtual disk being installed to, and the installer is puking. I''m trying to figure out why. I first get an rsync error 12, followed by the installer crashing. What''s interesting is this, deleting irrelevant source file systems, just showing the mounts for the installed system: [root@localhost tmp]# df Filesystem