Re: Kernel bug during RAID1 replace

[Saint Germain <saintger@gmail.com>]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2016 13:08:30 -0600, Chris Murphy
<lists@colorremedies.com> wrote :

> >> > Ok I will follow your advice and start over with a fresh BTRFS
> >> > volume. As explained on another email, rsync doesn't support
> >> > reflink, so do you think it is worth trying with BTRFS send
> >> > instead ? Is it safe to copy this way or rsync is more reliable
> >> > in case of faulty BTRFS volume ?
> >> >
> >> If you have the space, btrfs restore would probably be the best
> >> option. It's not likely, but using send has a risk of contaminating
> >> the new filesystem as well.
> >>
> >
> > I have to copy through the network (I am running out of disks...) so
> > btrfs restore is unfortunately not an option.
> > I didn't know that btrfs send could contaminate the target disk as
> > well ?
> > Ok rsync it is then.
> 
> restore will let you extract files despite csum errors. I don't think
> send will, and using cp or rsync Btrfs definitely won't hand over the
> file.
> 

That's Ok I'd prefer to avoid copying files with csum errors anyway (I
can restore them from backups).
However will btrfs send abort the whole operation as soon as it finds a
csum error ?
And will I have the risk to "contaminate" the target BTRFS volume by
using BTRFS send ?

Thanks !