| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
renkinjutsu
n00b
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Posts: 27
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:51 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| upengan78 wrote: | | darklegion wrote: | | Small_Penguin wrote: | I wanted to try btrfs with lzo compression for /usr/portage, hoping for the compression to speed things up.
Its partition size is only 512MiB. Unfortunately, the data does not even fit with btrfs. What a showstopper!
However, using ext4 with 1024 block size: /dev/sdb5 519412 376850 142562 73% /usr/portage
It's a pity ext4 can't do compression. However, both its stability and configurability are great and I had no problems so far. |
You need to enable the "-M" option when creating a small partition with btrfs. Otherwise it will use a lot of space for metadata. Regarding compressing /usr/portage you should probably use something like squashfs. |
mkbtrfs
| Code: | usage: mkfs.btrfs [options] dev [ dev ... ]
options:
-A --alloc-start the offset to start the FS
-b --byte-count total number of bytes in the FS
-d --data data profile, raid0, raid1, raid10 or single
-l --leafsize size of btree leaves
-L --label set a label
-m --metadata metadata profile, values like data profile
-n --nodesize size of btree nodes
-s --sectorsize min block allocation
Btrfs Btrfs v0.19 |
Don't see -M here. Can you tell me where one needs to enable -M option ? Thanks. |
The -M option is available if you install btrfs-progs-9999.
What it does is store the metadata WITH the data to be more space efficient. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kernelOfTruth
Watchman
Joined: 20 Dec 2005
Posts: 5345
Location: Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
renkinjutsu
n00b
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Posts: 27
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kernelOfTruth wrote: | | renkinjutsu wrote: |
The -M option is available if you install btrfs-progs-9999.
What it does is store the metadata WITH the data to be more space efficient. |
happy days !
once more formatting the partitions 
didn't know the progs had to be that recent
thx ! |
IIRC the patches are fairly old. I think Josef Bacik sent the patches in to make BtrFS usable on small devices. This was because people from moblin/meego wanted to use BtRFS on their mobile devices (so yeah.. pretty old).. But then again, btrfs-progs doesn't get updated very often. It's been 0.19 for ages! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kernelOfTruth
Watchman
Joined: 20 Dec 2005
Posts: 5345
Location: Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| renkinjutsu wrote: | | kernelOfTruth wrote: | | renkinjutsu wrote: |
The -M option is available if you install btrfs-progs-9999.
What it does is store the metadata WITH the data to be more space efficient. |
happy days !
once more formatting the partitions
didn't know the progs had to be that recent
thx ! |
IIRC the patches are fairly old. I think Josef Bacik sent the patches in to make BtrFS usable on small devices. This was because people from moblin/meego wanted to use BtRFS on their mobile devices (so yeah.. pretty old).. But then again, btrfs-progs doesn't get updated very often. It's been 0.19 for ages! |
well, in that case I must have overlooked it somehow 
-M --mixed mix metadata and data together
is there for me (emerged on January 6th this year)
who of you is using that switch ?
any issues with data integrity or data loss so far ?
_________________
Unofficial minimal livecd x86/amd64 w/reiser4+truecrypt (by Neo2)
2.6.37.2_plus_v1: BFS, CFS,THP,compaction, zcache or TOI
Hardcore Linux user since 2004  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dont Panic
Guru
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 308
Location: SouthEast U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kernelOfTruth wrote: | who of you is using that switch ?
any issues with data integrity or data loss so far ? |
I tested the Mixed Data/Metadata mode when it first came out.
It did result in a slowdown of about 10-15%. I can't precisely recall the metric I used to come to that conclusion, but the developer thought that was about what would be expected. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kernelOfTruth
Watchman
Joined: 20 Dec 2005
Posts: 5345
Location: Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dont Panic wrote: | | kernelOfTruth wrote: | who of you is using that switch ?
any issues with data integrity or data loss so far ? |
I tested the Mixed Data/Metadata mode when it first came out.
It did result in a slowdown of about 10-15%. I can't precisely recall the metric I used to come to that conclusion, but the developer thought that was about what would be expected. |
ok, I stopped using that since it didn't really get that much
seems like btrfs still isn't so stable and ready for prime-time
using 3.4 kernel's btrfs + 3.3.2
just wanted to rsync the portage-tree and got the following:
| Quote: | [ 6709.344432] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 6709.344436] rsync D ffff88023fcd1000 0 11893 11891 0x00000004
[ 6709.344443] ffff88019f329a40 0000000000000082 ffff88018b1dbe68 ffff88023698b480
[ 6709.344450] ffff88018b1dbfd8 ffff88018b1dbfd8 ffff88018b1dbfd8 ffff88019f329a40
[ 6709.344456] 0000000000000246 ffff8802147d4400 ffff8802147d4620 ffff88018b1dbed8
[ 6709.344462] Call Trace:
[ 6709.344473] [<ffffffff812dd443>] ? btrfs_find_free_ino+0xb3/0x140
[ 6709.344480] [<ffffffff81063450>] ? finish_wait+0x90/0x90
[ 6709.344486] [<ffffffff812f267d>] ? btrfs_mkdir+0x6d/0x1f0
[ 6709.344493] [<ffffffff811141d7>] ? vfs_mkdir+0x67/0xf0
[ 6709.344498] [<ffffffff811181fe>] ? sys_mkdirat+0xbe/0xd0
[ 6709.344504] [<ffffffff816da5a2>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[ 6829.137933] INFO: task btrfs-transacti:10710 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 6829.137937] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 6829.137941] btrfs-transacti D ffff88023fc51000 0 10710 2 0x00000000
[ 6829.137948] ffff880236228690 0000000000000046 0000000000000001 ffff8802368b6270
[ 6829.137955] ffff88019f9ebfd8 ffff88019f9ebfd8 ffff88019f9ebfd8 ffff880236228690
[ 6829.137961] ffff88014deea7e0 ffff88014b464050 ffff8802352de400 0000000000000000
[ 6829.137967] Call Trace:
[ 6829.137977] [<ffffffff816d72ea>] ? schedule_timeout+0x1ca/0x250
[ 6829.137986] [<ffffffff81330d16>] ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x66/0x1c0
[ 6829.137992] [<ffffffff811000e4>] ? kmem_cache_free+0x14/0x90
[ 6829.137997] [<ffffffff81304a02>] ? btrfs_run_ordered_operations+0x1d2/0x1f0
[ 6829.138005] [<ffffffff812e5942>] ? btrfs_commit_transaction+0x362/0x9e0
[ 6829.138012] [<ffffffff81063450>] ? finish_wait+0x90/0x90
[ 6829.138017] [<ffffffff812e6415>] ? start_transaction+0x95/0x2c0
[ 6829.138023] [<ffffffff812de715>] ? transaction_kthread+0x245/0x2c0
[ 6829.138028] [<ffffffff812de4d0>] ? check_leaf.isra.108+0x300/0x300
[ 6829.138033] [<ffffffff81063155>] ? kthread+0x85/0x90
[ 6829.138039] [<ffffffff816db754>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
[ 6829.138045] [<ffffffff810630d0>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0x80/0x80
[ 6829.138050] [<ffffffff816db750>] ? gs_change+0xb/0xb
[ 6829.138066] INFO: task rsync:11893 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 6829.138068] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 6829.138071] rsync D ffff88023fcd1000 0 11893 11891 0x00000004
[ 6829.138077] ffff88019f329a40 0000000000000082 ffff88018b1dbe68 ffff88023698b480
[ 6829.138083] ffff88018b1dbfd8 ffff88018b1dbfd8 ffff88018b1dbfd8 ffff88019f329a40
[ 6829.138089] 0000000000000246 ffff8802147d4400 ffff8802147d4620 ffff88018b1dbed8
[ 6829.138095] Call Trace:
[ 6829.138100] [<ffffffff812dd443>] ? btrfs_find_free_ino+0xb3/0x140
[ 6829.138106] [<ffffffff81063450>] ? finish_wait+0x90/0x90
[ 6829.138111] [<ffffffff812f267d>] ? btrfs_mkdir+0x6d/0x1f0
[ 6829.138117] [<ffffffff811141d7>] ? vfs_mkdir+0x67/0xf0
[ 6829.138123] [<ffffffff811181fe>] ? sys_mkdirat+0xbe/0xd0
[ 6829.138127] [<ffffffff816da5a2>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[ 6829.138133] INFO: task rsync:12029 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 6829.138135] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 6829.138138] rsync D ffff88023fc91000 0 12029 12027 0x00000004
[ 6829.138143] ffff88016126c830 0000000000000086 ffff880147c52fd0 ffff880236988d20
[ 6829.138149] ffff88019fa4bfd8 ffff88019fa4bfd8 ffff88019fa4bfd8 ffff88016126c830
[ 6829.138155] ffff88019fa4be38 ffff880147c53068 ffff880147c5306c ffff88016126c830
[ 6829.138161] Call Trace:
[ 6829.138166] [<ffffffff816d7cb1>] ? __mutex_lock_slowpath+0x101/0x1a0
[ 6829.138172] [<ffffffff811130da>] ? getname_flags+0xda/0x250
[ 6829.138176] [<ffffffff811000e4>] ? kmem_cache_free+0x14/0x90
[ 6829.138181] [<ffffffff81117d37>] ? user_path_at_empty+0x67/0xb0
[ 6829.138186] [<ffffffff816d765a>] ? mutex_lock+0x1a/0x40
[ 6829.138193] [<ffffffff8113137f>] ? utimes_common+0xaf/0x150
[ 6829.138199] [<ffffffff811314f7>] ? do_utimes+0xd7/0xf0
[ 6829.138204] [<ffffffff811315c9>] ? sys_utimensat+0x49/0x80
[ 6829.138208] [<ffffffff816da5a2>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[ 6948.931401] INFO: task btrfs-transacti:10710 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 6948.931405] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 6948.931409] btrfs-transacti D ffff88023fc51000 0 10710 2 0x00000000
[ 6948.931416] ffff880236228690 0000000000000046 0000000000000001 ffff8802368b6270
[ 6948.931423] ffff88019f9ebfd8 ffff88019f9ebfd8 ffff88019f9ebfd8 ffff880236228690
[ 6948.931429] ffff88014deea7e0 ffff88014b464050 ffff8802352de400 0000000000000000
[ 6948.931435] Call Trace:
[ 6948.931445] [<ffffffff816d72ea>] ? schedule_timeout+0x1ca/0x250
[ 6948.931453] [<ffffffff81330d16>] ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x66/0x1c0
[ 6948.931459] [<ffffffff811000e4>] ? kmem_cache_free+0x14/0x90
[ 6948.931465] [<ffffffff81304a02>] ? btrfs_run_ordered_operations+0x1d2/0x1f0
[ 6948.931473] [<ffffffff812e5942>] ? btrfs_commit_transaction+0x362/0x9e0
[ 6948.931480] [<ffffffff81063450>] ? finish_wait+0x90/0x90
[ 6948.931486] [<ffffffff812e6415>] ? start_transaction+0x95/0x2c0
[ 6948.931491] [<ffffffff812de715>] ? transaction_kthread+0x245/0x2c0
[ 6948.931496] [<ffffffff812de4d0>] ? check_leaf.isra.108+0x300/0x300
[ 6948.931501] [<ffffffff81063155>] ? kthread+0x85/0x90
[ 6948.931508] [<ffffffff816db754>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
[ 6948.931513] [<ffffffff810630d0>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0x80/0x80
[ 6948.931518] [<ffffffff816db750>] ? gs_change+0xb/0xb
[ 6948.931524] INFO: task rsync:11893 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 6948.931527] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 6948.931529] rsync D ffff88023fcd1000 0 11893 11891 0x00000004
[ 6948.931535] ffff88019f329a40 0000000000000082 ffff88018b1dbe68 ffff88023698b480
[ 6948.931541] ffff88018b1dbfd8 ffff88018b1dbfd8 ffff88018b1dbfd8 ffff88019f329a40
[ 6948.931547] 0000000000000246 ffff8802147d4400 ffff8802147d4620 ffff88018b1dbed8
[ 6948.931553] Call Trace:
[ 6948.931559] [<ffffffff812dd443>] ? btrfs_find_free_ino+0xb3/0x140
[ 6948.931564] [<ffffffff81063450>] ? finish_wait+0x90/0x90
[ 6948.931569] [<ffffffff812f267d>] ? btrfs_mkdir+0x6d/0x1f0
[ 6948.931575] [<ffffffff811141d7>] ? vfs_mkdir+0x67/0xf0
[ 6948.931581] [<ffffffff811181fe>] ? sys_mkdirat+0xbe/0xd0
[ 6948.931585] [<ffffffff816da5a2>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[ 6948.931591] INFO: task rsync:12029 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 6948.931593] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 6948.931596] rsync D ffff88023fc91000 0 12029 12027 0x00000004
[ 6948.931601] ffff88016126c830 0000000000000086 ffff880147c52fd0 ffff880236988d20
[ 6948.931607] ffff88019fa4bfd8 ffff88019fa4bfd8 ffff88019fa4bfd8 ffff88016126c830
[ 6948.931613] ffff88019fa4be38 ffff880147c53068 ffff880147c5306c ffff88016126c830
[ 6948.931619] Call Trace:
[ 6948.931624] [<ffffffff816d7cb1>] ? __mutex_lock_slowpath+0x101/0x1a0
[ 6948.931630] [<ffffffff811130da>] ? getname_flags+0xda/0x250
[ 6948.931634] [<ffffffff811000e4>] ? kmem_cache_free+0x14/0x90
[ 6948.931639] [<ffffffff81117d37>] ? user_path_at_empty+0x67/0xb0
[ 6948.931644] [<ffffffff816d765a>] ? mutex_lock+0x1a/0x40
[ 6948.931651] [<ffffffff8113137f>] ? utimes_common+0xaf/0x150
[ 6948.931657] [<ffffffff811314f7>] ? do_utimes+0xd7/0xf0
[ 6948.931662] [<ffffffff811315c9>] ? sys_utimensat+0x49/0x80
[ 6948.931666] [<ffffffff816da5a2>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[ 6948.931670] INFO: task emerge:12034 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 6948.931673] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 6948.931675] emerge D ffff88023fd91000 0 12034 7850 0x00000004
[ 6948.931681] ffff88023365cec0 0000000000000082 ffff88023fd970a0 ffff8802369e2df0
[ 6948.931687] ffff8801e7c3ffd8 ffff8801e7c3ffd8 ffff8801e7c3ffd8 ffff88023365cec0
[ 6948.931693] 0000000000000246 ffff880155921e10 ffff8802147d4520 ffff88015ca80180
[ 6948.931699] Call Trace:
[ 6948.931704] [<ffffffff812e4fa5>] ? wait_current_trans.isra.30+0xa5/0xf0
[ 6948.931710] [<ffffffff81063450>] ? finish_wait+0x90/0x90
[ 6948.931715] [<ffffffff812e64c5>] ? start_transaction+0x145/0x2c0
[ 6948.931720] [<ffffffff812f29f9>] ? btrfs_create+0x49/0x210
[ 6948.931725] [<ffffffff811142d4>] ? vfs_create+0x74/0xf0
[ 6948.931730] [<ffffffff8111761e>] ? do_last+0x5ee/0x890
[ 6948.931735] [<ffffffff811179d9>] ? path_openat+0xd9/0x3b0
[ 6948.931741] [<ffffffff81117dd4>] ? do_filp_open+0x44/0xb0
[ 6948.931746] [<ffffffff81123e6a>] ? alloc_fd+0xda/0x130
[ 6948.931752] [<ffffffff811080fd>] ? do_sys_open+0xed/0x1c0
[ 6948.931757] [<ffffffff816da5a2>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
|
seems like the partition is screwed - will run a scrub after next reboot when the partition is still accessible ...
edit:
scrub runs through suspiciously fast and returns no errors
data still seems accessible though (didn't test much more than a ls -l /usr/gentoo - where the partition is at)
but trying another rsync also leads to filesystems hang
so reformatting
the reason for this could be that I did half or close to a dozen times of suspend and resume
which in the past killed the filesystem after one or two passes
now it's much more resilient but still way too fragile for my taste
_________________
Unofficial minimal livecd x86/amd64 w/reiser4+truecrypt (by Neo2)
2.6.37.2_plus_v1: BFS, CFS,THP,compaction, zcache or TOI
Hardcore Linux user since 2004 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dont Panic
Guru
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 308
Location: SouthEast U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I had to go back and check.
I made my first post to this thread about 3 1/2 years ago on Thu Oct 30, 2008.
If I had to guess, I'd say we're still at least 2 years away from being stable. But I think I had the same timeline in 2008.
Oh well, maybe my children will have a stable Btrfs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Gentoo Chat
