On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Mordechay Kaganer <mkaganer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Then (if it's OK, hopefully) we'll see how to redo the replace. Maybe, > unmount and do a simple "dd" will be the best option? At least it's > not going to corrupt the original data :-). Use of dd can cause corruption of the original. "Do not make a block-level copy of a btrfs filesystem to a block device, and then try to mount either the original or the copy while both are visible to the same kernel." https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Gotchas Once you do the dd, you can't mount either one of the copies until one of the copies is completely hidden (i.e. on an LV that's inactive and flagged to never automatically become active). I think it's too risky just to avoid using a newer kernel. I'd sooner create a new file system and tediously btrfs send/receive the subvolumes you want to keep. -- 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
