Re: Several unhappy btrfs's after RAID meltdown

[Chris Samuel <chris@csamuel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1308 bytes --]

On Tuesday 07 February 2012 20:53:59 Duncan wrote:

> Kernel 3.2.2 is relatively recent altho you could 
> try the latest 3.3 rc or git kernel as well

Please keep in mind that work done in git does not appear to get 
backported to the stable updates for releases (such as 3.2.x), in 
other words you'll have the same btrfs code as in the first 3.2 
release.

You will need to use RC's (or git) for the current btrfs kernel code.

> Particularly when it's used on top of a dmcrypt layer that btrfs was
> known to have issues with

I believe the issues between btrfs and dm-crypt have been sorted out 
as of 3.2 (going on an earlier posting of Chris Masons).

Returning to the OP's case, I'm surprised that ext4 is able to get 
anything back and I'd say that's a testament to its long development 
life (ext->ext2->ext3->ext4) in comparison to btrfs. If that happened 
on a system I was sysadmin'ing (and it has - losing an entire tray of 
drives in a RAID array due to controller firmware bugs really spoils 
your day) I'd be reaching for the backup tapes about now.

Best of luck!
Chris
-- 
 Chris Samuel  :  http://www.csamuel.org/  :  Melbourne, VIC

This email may come with a PGP signature as a file. Do not panic.
For more info see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenPGP

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 482 bytes --]