Am Sat, 17 May 2014 08:08:17 +0800 schrieb William Kenworthy : > On 17/05/14 04:15, Marc Joliet wrote: > > So, a week has passed since my conversion to btrfs. > > > > So far there seem to have been no problems, my system has been running as if > > nothing has changed :) . Which, as a friend pointed out, is how it should be. > > > > I don't think there is anything particularly interesting to mention in addition > > to what I already wrote. I can just say that I think the effort was worth it. > > > > The one thing that I can tell from reading the past two weeks of the btrfs ML > > is that the 3.15 Linux kernel series will contain lots of bug fixes (for > > example in balancing, error handling, and send/receive), and that I will want > > to use that sooner rather than later. Of course, the severity of the problems > > varies, and a lot are triggered under odd, or at least uncommon, circumstances. > > Still, its worth paying attention to. > > > > Also, a lot of problem reports I saw came from people using other volume > > management below btrfs, interestingly enough. > > > > As for the future, I think I will wait a while, and get some experience with > > btrfs first. I suspect that by the time btrfs supports swap files, it will be > > stable enough that I would consider converting my SSD to also use btrfs > > anyway :) . Possibly before that, once I am fully convinced of btrfs' > > stability, I will also convert my backup drive and switch to using snapshots > > and send/receive to perform backups. Perhaps somebody will have written a > > backup solution on top of snapshots by then. > > > > Have a nice weekend, > > > > Don't forget to have a maintenance program - run a scrub regularly once > a week or so - I have enough btrfs drives (22 qemu files, 4 WD Greens > att) to see about one or two scrub fixable errors a week with no obvious > cause, sometimes serious (in a critical file). My experience is that if > you ignore these errors they seem to increase over time resulting in a > crash and burn. Keep an eye on your logs as btrfs will list the errors > there as well ("grep -i btrfs /var/log/messages"). For the ones scrub > cant fix, delete the file and restore from backup. Errors that require > off-line fixing (btrfsck) are the ones where I have lost file systems - > though I have not seen this in the last 6 months. I did not forget about scrubbing, though so far I have run them manually (once on Monday after a weekend away from the computer, and once tonight, both without error). Nevertheless, thanks for the reminder and extra info :) . BTW: I came across an interesting tool called dstat (indirectly while looking for which package contained iostat, which was mentioned on the btrfs ML). With "dstat -df", you can monitor the I/O of each individual drive. It's fun watching them be used in parallel :) . Anyway, with dstat I discovered that my drives have noticeably different throughput. Of course, I might have deduced that earlier: # btrfs scrub status -d /home scrub status for 472c9290-3ff2-4096-9c47-0612d3a52cef scrub device /dev/sda (id 1) history scrub started at Sat May 17 00:23:33 2014 and finished after 2536 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 215.42GiB with 0 errors scrub device /dev/sdb (id 2) history scrub started at Sat May 17 00:23:33 2014 and finished after 3519 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 216.32GiB with 0 errors scrub device /dev/sdc (id 3) history scrub started at Sat May 17 00:23:33 2014 and finished after 2346 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 216.57GiB with 0 errors scrub device /dev/sdd (id 4) history scrub started at Sat May 17 00:23:33 2014 and finished after 2346 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 215.68GiB with 0 errors Boy, is sdb slow! I might replace it with sde, which is laying around as a spare for now, and make sdb the spare instead. > I am quite practised in restoring from backups because of btrfs :) Haha :) . -- Marc Joliet -- "People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup