[Answer from Duncan, 1i5t5.duncan@DOMAIN.HIDDEN (Thanks for the try)] [AFAIK that shouldn't be the case. Degraded should allow the RW mount -- I know it did some kernels ago when I tried it then, and if it changed, it's news to me too, in which case I need to do some reevaluation here.] What I think /might/ have happened is that there's some other damage to the filesystem unrelated to the missing device in the raid1, which forces it read-only as soon as btrfs finds that damage. However, mount -o remount,rw,degraded should still work, I /think/.] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg20164.html [you should have already had that backup, and wouldn't need to make it, only perhaps update a few files that changed since your last backup that you were willing to lose the changes too if it came to it, but since you can still mount ro, you might as well take the chance to update the backup given that you can.] I have backups on other disks and from. Thats not my problem. That was just as a notice, to show that the data IS totally fine. It was/is RAID1, so why shouldnt it be. [As I said, to the best of my (non-dev btrfs user and list regular) knowledge, mount -o degraded,rw should work.] No, it doesnt. Syslog says: "Jan 30 12:44:02 fortknox kernel: [756677.795661] Btrfs: too many missing devices, writeable mount is not allowed" [One other thing that might help is the skip_balance mount option, to avoid restarting the in-process balance immediately.] No, same in syslog. [If that fails, try canceling the balance and then starting a new balance using balance filters...] The balance was already canceled AND its not possible to balance a ro filesystem. [Meanwhile, at least you have ro access to all the data and can take that backup that you apparently ignored the warnings about making, previously.] Yes, i can and no, i did not. -- 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
