From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Freitas Subject: Re: btrfs volume mounts and dies (was Re: Segfault in btrfsck) Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 12:11:35 -0800 Message-ID: <1262808695.6214.9.camel@phat> References: <1262476565.17096.20.camel@phat> <20100106075253.GA5665@cumulus> <1262793595.6214.5.camel@phat> <201001061824.37159.johannes.hirte@fem.tu-ilmenau.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <201001061824.37159.johannes.hirte@fem.tu-ilmenau.de> List-ID: Hi Johannes, On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 18:24 +0100, Johannes Hirte wrote: > Am Mittwoch 06 Januar 2010 16:59:55 schrieb Steve Freitas: > > Thanks for your response. You're correct about the bad sector warning. > > So please correct me if I have some mistaken assumptions. I thought > > btrfs would be tolerant of that -- if a block failed the checksum test, > > it would reconstruct and remap it. > Only if enough redundancy is left. And with the default setup btrfs is only > mirroring the metadata not the data. Okay. What capacity does btrfs have for reconstructing data, and how do I enable it (if any) for a new partition? I think I've confused checksums with magical ponies. > Bad sectors are only remapped by the drive on write time. As long as this > isn't the case, they are only marked as pending. As you have written, that > SMART detected many bad blocks, I suspect the FS is really damaged. And as > btrfsck is limited, I don't think it can fix this. Alright, I'll trash it and start over with a different drive. Thanks, Steve