And another worrying thing I didn't notice before. Two snapshots have dates that do not make sense. root-b3 and root-b4 have been created Oct 14th (and btw root's modification time was also on Oct the 14th). So why do they show Oct 10th? And root-prov has actually been created on Oct 10 15:37, as it correctly shows, so it's like btrfs sub snap picks up old stale data from who knows were or when or for what reason. Moreover, root-b4 was created with 3.16.5....not good. drwxrwsr-x 1 root staff 30 Sep 11 16:15 home d????????? ? ? ? ? ? home-backup drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 250 Oct 14 03:02 root d????????? ? ? ? ? ? root-b2 drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 250 Oct 10 15:37 root-b3 drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 250 Oct 10 15:37 root-b4 drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 250 Oct 14 03:02 root-b5 drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 250 Oct 14 03:02 root-b6 d????????? ? ? ? ? ? root-backup drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 250 Oct 10 15:37 root-prov drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 88 Sep 15 16:02 vms On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Rich Freeman <r-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 5:22 PM, john terragon <jterragon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I'm using "compress=no" so compression doesn't seem to be related, at >> least in my case. Just read-only snapshots on 3.17 (although I haven't >> tried 3.16). > > I was using lzo compression, and hence my comment about turning it off > before going back to 3.16 (not realizing that 3.16 has subsequently > been fixed). > > Ironically enough I discovered this as I was about to migrate my ext4 > backup drive into my btrfs raid1. Maybe I'll go ahead and wait on > that and have an rsync backup of the filesystem handy (minus > snapshots) just in case. :) > > I'd switch to 3.16, but it sounds like there is no way to remove the > snapshots at the moment, and I can live for a while without the > ability to create new ones. > > interestingly enough it doesn't look like ALL snapshots are affected. > I checked and some of the snapshots I made last weekend while doing > system updates look accessible. They are significantly smaller, and > the subvolumes they were made from are also fairly new - though I have > no idea if that is related. > > The subvolumes do show up in btrfs su list. They cannot be examined > using btrfs su show. > > It would be VERY nice to have a way of cleaning this up without > blowing away the entire filesystem... > > -- > Rich -- 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
