similar to: BUG btrfs fi show displays stale btrfs volume

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

Hi All, the following patches implement the recursively snapshotting and deleting of a subvolume. To snapshot recursively you must pass the -R switch: # btrfs subvolume create sub1 Create subvolume ''./sub1'' # btrfs subvolume create sub1/sub2 Create subvolume ''sub1/sub2'' # btrfs subvolume snapshot -R sub1 sub1-snap Create a snapshot of

I create a new btrfs filesystem and then add a new device and delete the original device. When I run ''btrfs filesystem show'', the total device is two and there is an error that some devices are missing. I also tried to resize the filesystem but didn''t work. Resizing without device id have an error that there is no such device. When the device id is explicitly pass, an

-----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

Hi I''ve made some updates on the wiki and I''d like a technical review for correctness. This particular topic is already confusing - some unnecessary sarcasm made it even more so: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ#Why_does_df_show_incorrect_free_space_for_my_RAID_volume.3F Due to the terms "used" and "allocated" in the wiki, viric in #btrfs made

Currently, the following commands succeed. # cat /proc/swaps Filename Type Size Used Priority /dev/sda3 partition 8388604 0 -1 /dev/sdc8 partition 9765884 0 -2 # mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdc8 WARNING! - Btrfs v0.20-rc1-165-g82ac345 IS EXPERIMENTAL WARNING! - see

Hi Rich: This is a alternative patch, if you like the api name called wipefs ;-P Thanks -Wanlong Gao Wanlong Gao (2): NEW API: add a new api wipefs virt-format: erase the filesystem signatures before erase partitions TODO | 2 -- daemon/zero.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ format/format.c | 19 ++++---------------

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907554 In particular comments 2 & 3. We could change libguestfs's guestfs_mkfs (internally) so it always does an implicit wipefs on the filesystem. wipefs is not too onerous -- in particular I believe it only writes to a few chosen areas of the disk. Especially considering that we're about to run mkfs anyway which for some filesystems

Add the new api zero_fs to erase the filesystem signatures on a device but now erase any data. Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/zero.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ generator/generator_actions.ml | 14 ++++++++++++++ src/MAX_PROC_NR | 2 +- 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/zero.c

Hi Rich: This is a latest patch. ;-P Comments? Thanks -Wanlong Gao Wanlong Gao (2): NEW API: add a new api wipefs virt-format: erase the filesystem signatures before erase partitions TODO | 2 -- daemon/zero.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ format/format.c | 19 ++++--------------- generator/generator_actions.ml | 14

My wipefs has no --force option, as a result mke2fs command in guestfish fails. Looks like 72dd398679cd0bb803daf306d12558369615ba70 needs an adjustment to make use of do_wipefs? Also str_wipefs is not used in that file. Olaf

Btrfs has been broken for me for ages. I first reported it on this list 5 months ago[1]. Below is a very simple reproducer that anyone can run. *NB* before you run this, adjust /dev/sda & /dev/sda1 to point to an unused block device! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- #!/bin/sh - set -e while true; do parted -s -- /dev/sda mklabel msdos parted -s --

Hi, I have a test system that booted fine using "Legacy Bios? mode and using the following Kickstart snippet configured the disks correctly:- # Clear the Master Boot Record zerombr # Partition clearing information clearpart --all --initlabel # Disk partitioning information part raid.01 --fstype="raid" --ondisk=sda --size=500 part raid.02 --fstype="raid" --grow

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

On 08/19/2016 11:35 PM, Phil Manuel wrote: > The install fails under UEFi due to the fact the partitions are not cleared, and it doesn?t have any space to continue. Is there an extra step I need to do to remove the original partitions before the new layout will work ? Yes. If you have pre-existing RAID partitions, they'll automatically assemble before Anaconda runs, and the installer

On Sun, 21 Aug 2016 at 12:51 Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer at gmail.com> wrote: > On 08/19/2016 11:35 PM, Phil Manuel wrote: > > The install fails under UEFi due to the fact the partitions are not > cleared, and it doesn?t have any space to continue. Is there an extra step > I need to do to remove the original partitions before the new layout will > work ? > > >

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 05:28:33PM +0200, Karel Zak wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 02:55:59PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:11:48AM +0200, Karel Zak wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 05:42:21PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > In any case I'll probably write a small utility which just zaps the > > > >

I have 2 DCs running 4.1.12 that have stopped replicating and are producing these error messages: from dc1: Failed to commit objects: WERR_GENERAL_FAILURE/NT_STATUS_INVALID_NETWORK_RESPONSE [2014/09/23 10:43:35.530000, 0] ../source4/rpc_server/drsuapi/getncchanges.c:1646(dcesrv_drsuapi_DsGetNCChanges) ../source4/rpc_server/drsuapi/getncchanges.c:1646: DsGetNCChanges 2nd replication on

On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli <kreijack@gmail.com> wrote: >       filesystem resize [+/-]<size>[gkm]|max <filesystem> -filesystem resize [+/-]<size>[gkm]|max <filesystem> +filesystem resize [+/-]<size>[gkm]|max <dev> This command works on devices, not paths. >              Resize a filesystem identified by <path>.  The

On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 07:42:58PM +0100, Olaf Hering wrote: > My wipefs has no --force option, as a result mke2fs command in guestfish fails. > > Looks like 72dd398679cd0bb803daf306d12558369615ba70 needs an adjustment > to make use of do_wipefs? > Also str_wipefs is not used in that file. Also daemon/zero.c has a wipefs_has_force_option function. It seems like it would be better