On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 04:44:30PM +0400, Michael Raskin wrote: > Hello. > > I am continuing my tests of BtrFS under a practical workload. Recently > an incorrect poweroff (or maybe a small bug in BtrFS) caused a small > data loss. The actual damage was non-existent. > I used old branch, so maybe the relevant code is already improved. > > 1. Why btrfsck says "bad block" on that partition? What does it mean? > My fist reaction was to use badblocks. It found no badblocks in its own > sense, so I assume btrfsck means something else. It would be nice to > explain that to user. Maybe "damaged FS data block" ? Yes, it would make sense to make these more informative. > > 2. I found a file which is listed in the directory, but stat on it > returns "No such file or directory". Certainly, rm and unlink cannot > remove it. The partition has 14G in use. What can I do to provide a > useful piece of FS structure information? How can I remove the file > afterwards. I'd say to send us the btrfsck output, it will help answer these questions. > > 3. On a 30G partition with 14G used btrfsck was left overnight. It has > neither finished nor printed any meaningful request for interaction. Is > it normal? Definitely not ;) You can check with vmstat to see if btrfsck is actually doing anything, but it sounds like you hit a bug. Which version of the kernel and tools are you using? -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
