Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> covici posted on Sat, 10 Oct 2015 19:08:16 -0400 as excerpted:
>
> > covici@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> >> Lionel Bouton <lionel+ceph@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Le 10/10/2015 18:55, covici@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx a écrit :
> >> > > [...]
> >> > > But do you folks have any idea about my original question, this
> >> > > leads me to think that btrfs is too new or something.
> >> >
> >> > I've seen a recent report of a problem with btrfs-progs 4.2 confirmed
> >> > as a bug in mkfs. As you created the filesystem with it, it could be
> >> > the problem.
> >
> > I do have 4.2.2, I could go to, would that be better?
>
> btrfs-progs-4.2.2 does indeed have the mkfs.btrfs fixes for the bug in
> question. You should be fine remaking the filesystem with it.
>
> If you created the filesystem with the buggy mkfs.btrfs, AFAIK, current
> 4.2.2 btrfs check can detect the error, but can't fix it. Blowing away
> the filesystem and recreating is the only known fix at this time, and
> filesystems created with the buggy version are not safe and could blow up
> at any time, so it's best to be rid of them and onto something more
> stable as soon as possible.
>
> I can't help with the subvolumes bit, however, because while I'm on
> gentoo/~amd64 here too, also with systemd...
>
> I don't use subvolumes, as to me it's simply putting too many eggs in one
> filesystem basket. Instead, I prefer multiple separate btrfs
> filesystems, each on their own partitions. My / includes most of what
> packages install, including /usr and /var but not /var/log. It's 8 GiB
> in size, under half used. /home is separate, the repos tree (gentoo and
> overlays) along with ccache, binpackages, the kernel tree, etc, are
> together on a separate partition, /var/log is separate (and tiny, half a
> GiB), etc. I keep / mounted read-only by default, so have the parts of /
> var/lib that must be runtime-writable symlinked to subdirs of /home/var,
> with /home of course mounted writable, but other than that and some /var/
> log/ subdirs, anything that's installed by a package is on /, a lesson I
> learned the hard way when I had to recover from backups where /, /usr
> and /var were from backups taken on different dates and thus not
> synchronized with what portage /thought/ was installed based on /var/db/
> pkg.
>
> Not saying that's best for you, but it's a solution that I've found works
> very well for me, and the relative small 8 GiB size of / makes it easy to
> have backup copies of it that I can boot, should my working / take a
> dump. But if it's all on the same filesystem, as it is with subvolumes,
> and that filesystem takes a dump... it's all gone at once! That's not
> something I want to happen, so I vastly prefer the independent
> filesystems, but with everything (but the limited exceptions mentioned
> above) the package manager deals with on the same one, so it all stays
> synced and is backed up as a single unit, which after all remains
> reasonably small, 8 GiB, less than half used.
Thanks, in the ext4 world, I have lvm and lots of things using separate
lvm's. I don't want to go back to partitions, if btrfs is that fragile,
maybe I should waita while yet. Or, I could use lvm and put btrfs on
top of that, but it seems strange to me.
--
Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is:
How do
you spend it?
John Covici
covici@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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
