From: Martin Steigerwald <martin@lichtvoll.de>
To: Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com>
Cc: Martin Raiber <martin@urbackup.org>,
Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: With Linux 5.5: Filesystem full while still 90 GiB free
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 21:02:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <21104414.nfYVoVUMY0@merkaba> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJCQCtQgqg2u78q2vZi=bEy+bkzX48M+vHXR00dsuNYWaxqRKg@mail.gmail.com>
Chris Murphy - 30.01.20, 17:37:42 CET:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:41 AM Martin Steigerwald
<martin@lichtvoll.de> wrote:
> > Chris Murphy - 29.01.20, 23:55:06 CET:
> > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 2:20 PM Martin Steigerwald
> >
> > <martin@lichtvoll.de> wrote:
> > > > So if its just a cosmetic issue then I can wait for the patch to
> > > > land in linux-stable. Or does it still need testing?
> > >
> > > I'm not seeing it in linux-next. A reasonable short term work
> > > around
> > > is mount option 'metadata_ratio=1' and that's what needs more
> > > testing, because it seems decently likely mortal users will need
> > > an easy work around until a fix gets backported to stable. And
> > > that's gonna be a while, me thinks.
> > >
> > > Is that mount option sufficient? Or does it take a filtered
> > > balance?
> > > What's the most minimal balance needed? I'm hoping -dlimit=1
> >
> > Does not make a difference. I did:
> >
> > - mount -o remount,metadata_ratio=1 /daten
> > - touch /daten/somefile
> > - dd if=/dev/zero of=/daten/someotherfile bs=1M count=500
> > - sync
> > - df still reporting zero space free
> >
> > > I can't figure out a way to trigger this though, otherwise I'd be
> > > doing more testing.
> >
> > Sure.
> >
> > I am doing the balance -dlimit=1 thing next. With metadata_ratio=0
> > again.
> >
> > % btrfs balance start -dlimit=1 /daten
> > Done, had to relocate 1 out of 312 chunks
> >
> > % LANG=en df -hT /daten
> > Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> > /dev/mapper/sata-daten btrfs 400G 311G 0 100% /daten
> >
> > Okay, doing with metadata_ratio=1:
> >
> > % mount -o remount,metadata_ratio=1 /daten
> >
> > % btrfs balance start -dlimit=1 /daten
> > Done, had to relocate 1 out of 312 chunks
> >
> > % LANG=en df -hT /daten
> > Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> > /dev/mapper/sata-daten btrfs 400G 311G 0 100% /daten
> >
> >
> > Okay, other suggestions? I'd like to avoid shuffling 311 GiB data
> > around using a full balance.
>
> There's earlier anecdotal evidence that -dlimit=10 will work. But you
> can just keep using -dlimit=1 and it'll balance a different block
> group each time (you can confirm/deny this with the block group
> address and extent count in dmesg for each balance). Count how many it
> takes to get df to stop misreporting. It may be a file system
> specific value.
Lost the patience after 25 attempts:
date; let I=I+1; echo "Balance $I"; btrfs balance start -dlimit=1 /daten
; LANG=en df -hT /daten
Do 30. Jan 20:59:17 CET 2020
Balance 25
Done, had to relocate 1 out of 312 chunks
Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/sata-daten btrfs 400G 311G 0 100% /daten
Doing the -dlimit=10 balance now:
% btrfs balance start -dlimit=10 /daten ; LANG=en df -hT /daten
Done, had to relocate 10 out of 312 chunks
Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/sata-daten btrfs 400G 311G 0 100% /daten
Okay, enough of balancing for today.
I bet I just wait for a proper fix, instead of needlessly shuffling data
around.
Thanks for the suggestions tough.
--
Martin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-30 20:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-29 19:33 With Linux 5.5: Filesystem full while still 90 GiB free Martin Steigerwald
2020-01-29 20:04 ` Martin Raiber
2020-01-29 21:20 ` Martin Steigerwald
2020-01-29 22:55 ` Chris Murphy
2020-01-30 10:41 ` Martin Steigerwald
2020-01-30 16:37 ` Chris Murphy
2020-01-30 20:02 ` Martin Steigerwald [this message]
2020-01-30 20:18 ` Chris Murphy
2020-01-30 20:59 ` Josef Bacik
2020-01-30 21:09 ` Chris Murphy
2020-01-30 21:32 ` Martin Raiber
2020-01-30 21:42 ` Josef Bacik
2020-01-30 21:12 ` Martin Steigerwald
2020-01-30 21:10 ` Martin Steigerwald
2020-01-30 21:20 ` Remi Gauvin
2020-01-30 23:12 ` Martin Steigerwald
2020-01-31 1:43 ` Matt Corallo
2020-01-31 1:57 ` Qu Wenruo
2020-03-02 1:57 ` Etienne Champetier
2020-03-02 1:59 ` Qu Wenruo
2020-01-31 4:12 ` Etienne Champetier
2020-01-30 17:19 ` David Sterba
2020-01-30 19:31 ` Chris Murphy
2020-01-30 19:58 ` Martin Steigerwald
2020-01-31 3:00 ` Zygo Blaxell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=21104414.nfYVoVUMY0@merkaba \
--to=martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lists@colorremedies.com \
--cc=martin@urbackup.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox