Re: btrfs says no errors, but booting gives lots of errors

[covici@ccs.covici.com]

covici@ccs.covici.com wrote:

> Lionel Bouton <lionel+ceph@bouton.name> wrote:
> 
> > Le 10/10/2015 18:55, covici@ccs.covici.com 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.
> > Note that btrfs-progs 4.2 is marked ~amd64 on Gentoo: when you live on
> > the bleeding edge you shouldn't be surprised to bleed sometimes ;-)
> > 
> > You might have more luck by better describing the errors. Your title
> > mentions lots of errors, but there's only one log extract in a zip file
> > for a filesystem being mounted and it's only a warning about lock
> > contention which from an educated guess seems unlikely to make programs
> > crash.
> > I'm not familiar with the 203 exit codes you mention. This seems a
> > systemd thing with unclear meaning from a quick Google search so it
> > isn't really helpful unless there are kernel oops or panics for these
> > errors too.
> 
> These errors are not kernel panicks, they are just that systemd units
> are not starting and the programs that  are executed in the unit files
> are returning these errors such as the 203 with no other explanation.  I
> tried for instance to run /usr/bin/postgresql-9.4-check-db-dir and it
> said that postgresql.conf was missing, but I could do an ls on that file
> and got the name.  I think I have more like that, but no kernel errors
> and scrub has no errors.  Should I go back to an earlier btrfs progs
> and, if so, which one?

I do have 4.2.2, I could go to, would that be better?