Re: safe/necessary to balance system chunks?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Apr 25, 2014, at 5:03 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> But since -m/metadata includes -s/
> system by default, and that was the intended way of doing things,
> -f/force was added as necessary when doing only -s/system, since 
> presumably that was considered an artificial distinction, and handling -s/
> system as a part of -m/metadata was considered the more natural method.

OK so somehow in Steve's conversion, metadata was converted from DUP to RAID1 completely, but some portion of system was left as DUP, incompletely converted to RAID1. It doesn't seem obvious that -mconvert is what he'd use now, but maybe newer btrfs-progs it will also convert any unconverted system chunk.

If not, then -sconvert=raid1 -f and optionally -v.

This isn't exactly risk free, given that it requires -f; and I'm not sure we can risk assess conversion failure vs the specific drive containing system DUP chunks dying. But for me a forced susage balance was fast:

[root@rawhide ~]# time btrfs balance start -susage=100 -f -v /
Dumping filters: flags 0xa, state 0x0, force is on
  SYSTEM (flags 0x2): balancing, usage=100
Done, had to relocate 1 out of 8 chunks

real	0m0.095s
user	0m0.001s
sys	0m0.017s


Chris Murphy--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux