similar to: Centos 7 and btrfs

On 28.12.2017 16:50, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Matt wrote: >> I am setting up a new test server. Doing a fresh install from CD onto >> a couple 4TB drives. Would like to try btrfs in a RAID 1 format. Are >> there any how to's on how to do that? > > I was under the impression that upstream was deprecating BTRFS. brtfs was only a technology preview in RHEL 7

On 18/05/2019 10:22, Hendrik Friedel via samba wrote: > Hello, > > I a bit surprised to get no replies at all... > How come? Lack of information? Lack of clarity? > > Greetings, > Hendrik > No, probably a lack of users using your combination of Samba, btrfs and quotas. Of course, more info may help, what is in your smb.conf etc. Why are you using a filesystem that your

On 18/05/2019 14:19, Hendrik Friedel wrote: > Hello > >> No, probably a lack of users using your combination of Samba, btrfs >> and quotas. > I would have thought that btrfs is becoming more mainstream now. And > then, Samba and Quotas should be rather common... >> Is btrfs becoming more common ? > >> Of course, more info may help, what is in your smb.conf

I have 4 partitions on my hard drive 1 = /boot on ext2 2 = Swap 3 = / on brtfs 4 = /home on btrfs The uuid on partition 3 on my last boot was cloned to partition 4, so when I try to mount either 3 or 4 they both mount the / partition. We tried 7182011 git, and the current version in the ARCH 1062010, and neither had an option for resetting the UUID that we could find.  Both partitions were

Hi, I have setup about a year ago a BTRFS RAID 1 filesystem on two 2TB Western Digital WD20EARS hard drives and I have created subvolumes that I mount regularly as I need them. I put mostly music, videos and various files on them as well as some Git bare repositories for my work files but for the last couple of weeks, there seems to be some activity happening on the drives for a few minutes and

Hello, by suggestion from linux-btrfs I post this to samba at lists.samba.org. I think, thiss is a bug in Samba. Can you confirm and suggest a workaround? Regards, Hendrik ------ Weitergeleitete Nachricht ------ Von: "Hendrik Friedel" <hendrik at friedels.name> An: "Btrfs BTRFS" <linux-btrfs at vger.kernel.org> Gesendet: 12.05.2019 13:27:00 Betreff: Btrfs Samba

I've just noticed that I'm having issues with finding files using "locate" when those files are on btrfs subvolume mounts. The issue is that updatedb cannot discern the difference between a btrfs bind mount and btrfs subvolume [1]. This generally means that if you're using btrfs subvolume mounts and updatedb at the same time, and you want to index those subvolumes,

Matt wrote: > I am setting up a new test server. Doing a fresh install from CD onto > a couple 4TB drives. Would like to try btrfs in a RAID 1 format. Are > there any how to's on how to do that? I was under the impression that upstream was deprecating BTRFS. mark

Dne 09.09.2020 v 17:52 John Stoffel napsal(a): > Miloslav> There is a one PCIe RAID controller in a chasis. AVAGO > Miloslav> MegaRAID SAS 9361-8i. And 16x SAS 15k drives conneced to > Miloslav> it. Because the controller does not support pass-through for > Miloslav> the drives, we use 16x RAID-0 on controller. So, we get > Miloslav> /dev/sda ... /dev/sdp (roughly) in

Hi, thank you for your reply. I'll continue inline... Dne 09.09.2020 v 3:15 John Stoffel napsal(a): > Miloslav> Hello, > Miloslav> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: > Miloslav> "RAID-1 would be preferable" > Miloslav> (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). >

brtfs could be supported on Opensolaris, too. IMO it could even complement ZFS and spawn some concurrent development between both. ZFS is too high end and works very poorly with less than 2GB while brtfs reportedly works well with 128MB on ARM. Olga On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 5:31 PM, <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote: > > >>Just a completely different question...is there any plans

I ran into a panic while running find -xdev | xargs brtfs fi defrag ''{}''. I don''t remember the exact command because the history was not saved. I also started and stopped it a few times however. The kernel logs were on a different filesystem. Here is the kern.log:http://fpaste.org/9383/36729191/ My setup is two 2TB hard drives in raid 1. They are both sata drives so

Dear Devs, I have x4 4TB HDDs formatted with: mkfs.btrfs -L bu-16TB_0 -d raid1 -m raid1 /dev/sd[cdef] /etc/fstab mounts with the options: noatime,noauto,space_cache,inode_cache All on kernel 3.8.13. Upon using rsync to copy some heavily hardlinked backups from ReiserFS, I''ve seen: The following "block rsv returned -28" is repeated 7 times until there is a call trace

Hello, I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: "RAID-1 would be preferable" (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). May I ask you for the comments as from people around the Dovecot? We are using btrfs RAID-10 (/data, 4.7TB) on a physical Supermicro server with Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @

Unfortunately my laptop deadlocks from time to time, and too often it triggers this bug in btrfs which is quite hard to recover from. The bigger problem is that all the user sees (if anything) is seemingly unrelated info, namely, "RIP: btrfs_num_copies+0x42/0x0b" or somesuch http://marc.merlins.org/tmp/btrfs_num_copies.jpg It''s only if you have serial console, or netconsole,

Thanks for the reply. How to know that the CentOS 7 kerenel is whether PV or HVM? When I searched about it, I found the following link, where the kernel type us determined from the 2 following commands 1. uname -r 2. lsmod | grep xen If both have "*xen*", then it is PV, if lsmod returns something but not in kernel name then its PV-HVM, else its HVM >From what

On Sunday, I did a "yum update" which installed kernel 2.6.32-573.3.1.el6.i686 on half a dozen virtual machines running CentOS 6.7. Since then, two of them have gone into "meltdown", and started spewing "ABRT Daemon" emails: one on Tuesday, and one tonight. The machines have a very light workload -- one runs "trac", and a handful of development systems,

hw wrote: > Mark Haney wrote: <snip> >> BTRFS isn't going to impact I/O any more significantly than, say, XFS. > > But mdadm does, the impact is severe. I know there are ppl saying > otherwise, but I?ve seen the impact myself, and I definitely don?t want > it on that particular server because it would likely interfere with > other services. <snip> I

Hi guys, I'm having some problems installing Microsoft Office 2007 in my Fedora 15 (x64) with wine version 1.3.21. I've followed several how-to's including some here in WineHQ. I've followed every step in those how-to's, winecfg, dll's, winetricks, etc ... i can run setup.exe till the end with success. When i try to launch Outlook, Word, Excel, anything it gives me the

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?