On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 11:05:46AM -0400, Sonic wrote: > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Sonic <sonicsmith@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Is "btrfs rescue super-recover" safe to run? IOW, will it ask before > > doing anything possibly destructive (assuming I don't give it a -y)? > > Seemed a bit safe so I went for it and: > > sartre ~ # btrfs rescue super-recover /dev/sdc > All supers are valid, no need to recover > sartre ~ # btrfs rescue super-recover /dev/sde > All supers are valid, no need to recover > > So it may not be a superblock issue. > > From the dmesg earlier: > [ 3421.193734] BTRFS (device sde): bad tree block start > 8330001001141004672 20971520 > [ 3421.193738] BTRFS: failed to read chunk root on sde > [ 3421.203221] BTRFS: open_ctree failed > > I may need a chunk-recover and also wonder if zero-log is advisable. > Any ideas in those directions? Very unlikely and definitely not, respectively. There's nothing at all here to indicate that you've got a broken log, so dropping it would be at best pointless. The chunk tree is also most likely undamaged on both copies. Hugo. -- Hugo Mills | The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse hugo@... carfax.org.uk | gets the cheese. http://carfax.org.uk/ | PGP: E2AB1DE4 |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
