From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4936CC43441 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 18:40:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A1E6208E7 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 18:40:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rdcsafety-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@rdcsafety-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="kMLxOGjc" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0A1E6208E7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=rdcsafety.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727123AbeKPEsx (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2018 23:48:53 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-f182.google.com ([209.85.215.182]:44633 "EHLO mail-pg1-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726453AbeKPEsx (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2018 23:48:53 -0500 Received: by mail-pg1-f182.google.com with SMTP id t13so736485pgr.11 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 10:39:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rdcsafety-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=reply-to:to:from:subject:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=1z/lZ0kPK2kleapIwGi+JZ1s4bOMrJTIk5dpV/8A22U=; b=kMLxOGjcWnMNTe90nGV5aUKBODm3ly5VI+DFkXJg/71Zj7QGCw7hcvpgMN8fInp3fM h8OzEIDxi24ERuOtxJiWlBf65Avw/UMFppAhjzeFHSBf74bLR4SR4Jp7ICOzDhiUTx7i BZOTCFJWJIEhNoyPSLwUE2Fk+vEBDuYG1I6qI9Wpz7eeFsSk5bbGaT64Om7FhF0UQxac iLv59O0NQJcg1/Jmd5tiylJHv2teTGUw3oQU0f8kYHr4ZSJvb+GRCx0DJtiTCUB3UqkK +8nKuts0eEiA4SEM7jDoO3sQ0YUdrzUxCmrMh0lA6LUo6lq673xzWLEvbCVp8qbHmBEw OxCg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:to:from:subject:organization:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=1z/lZ0kPK2kleapIwGi+JZ1s4bOMrJTIk5dpV/8A22U=; b=LH61EqcIjD+ximlSeZfqEs2C+6JTF/WjLJ44RdFAIt9PYc9wuRA1ArgPbXYNlHB1n6 RsUgCPjMyF2ZDs8W2QV7sTu2Jy+D/H04kGv7Ah/DcZo5+pmNHwBwuVqrD6lVuOBJmIvp amVT0AJl122tEbOYqkXtw4cMUOZLAc1NaJ7RI0Vj1jv4pmo4olpoKRj1joubNcoWqr4G iTTqJGuDvweTuI3l98S238xBweUn0XM8DNEzkcdQ+3WhBj805Gm9ts2arOzB0jg1rnmc D/8OUa0eyeN2YkjNhvc/+rCklBArvFMlH8et/VBwDP/1V8736AthNzLtiik5sHDXxyAh EO7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gIMD7nNZsV57x9WVOpxls9mtHRSZZ6P9SqLvUVg4UnNmS4VM4ca F/25rEXUkM9KtTP+CrMGIuTQQcXC0UI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5efK0tdUM4DHsXPB7w0a4dG67ZKvL1digIwvKoIp+9MldgBVIGoqOBZxyREOWLOLVBkH4tXPA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:ef0b:: with SMTP id u11-v6mr6852803pgh.283.1542307197444; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 10:39:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.3.92] (S0106a8c7ddf0eb43.fm.shawcable.net. [50.65.49.17]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v12-v6sm37263082pfa.167.2018.11.15.10.39.56 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 15 Nov 2018 10:39:56 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: jacirez@rdcsafety.com To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org From: Juan Alberto Cirez Subject: BTRFS on production: NVR 16+ IP Cameras Organization: RDC Safety Plus, Inc. Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 11:39:58 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Is BTRFS mature enough to be deployed on a production system to underpin the storage layer of a 16+ ipcameras-based NVR (or VMS if you prefer)? Based on our limited experience with BTRFS (1+ year) under the above scenario the answer seems to be no; but I wanted you ask the community at large for their experience before making a final decision to hold off on deploying BTRFS on production systems. Let us be clear: We think BTRFS has great potential, and as it matures we will continue to watch its progress, so that at some future point we can return to using it. The issue has been the myriad of problems we have encountered when deploying BTRFS as the storage fs for the NVR/VMS in cases were the camera count exceeds 10: Corrupted file systems, sudden read-only file system, re-balance kernel panics, broken partitions, etc. One specific case saw the btrfs drive pool mounted under the /var partition so that upon installation the btrfs pool contained all files under /var; /lib/mysql as well as the video storage. Needless to say this was a catastrophe... At the other end of the spectrum is a use case where ONLY the video storage was on the btrfs pool; but in that case, the btrfs pool became read-only suddenly and would not re-mount as rw despite all the recovery trick btrfs-tools could throw at it. This, of course prevented the NVR/VMS from recording any footage. So, again, the question is: is BTRFS mature enough to be used in such use case and if so, what approach can be used to mitigate such issues. Thank you all for your assistance -Ryan- -- Ryan Burt, B. Sc. for Juan Alberto Cirez, CFPT