I am about to setup a computer with Maverick. This will be for experiment use only, there will be nothing of any critical nature on it. Should I consider using the BTRFS, yes or no ? What would be the advantages/disadvantages (if any) on using it as opposed to EXT4 ?
View 4 RepliesI'm running Maverick on an older Stinkpad. I have a btrfs /home as a second partition on the internal HDDand a brand shiny new 3TB external USB western digital drive also formatted btrfs. I'm having a problem whenever I hibernate/suspend the laptop by closing the lid and start it back up later, the external drive won't remount unless I do a complete reboot. I have no entry in /etc/fstab for the external drive.Quote:Unable to mount "blah" DBus error org.gtk.Private.RemoteVolumeMonitor.Failed: An operation is already pending
View 3 Replies View RelatedSo I have installed Debian through debootstrap and it seemed to go off without a hitch, the problem came problem came about during the boot process. I am dual-booting with Arch and use Systemd-boot as my bootloader... it finds the kernal and initrd and starts to boot but I run into this problem where it gets to the options part for root and doesn't mount. have done this very same installation on virtualbox with ext4 filesystem and it worked without a hitch.. I know it has something to do with the btrfs subvolumes I'm so new to Debian I haven't made it past this installation process..
here is my lsblk
Code: Select all
sda 8:0 0 /My_Files
sdb 8:32 0 /home
sdc 8:48 0
[code]....
I have installed btrfs-tools and I don't know what the following means... It seems to do the first two fine, vmlinuz and initrd.img but it doesn't find my root because maybe it doesn't recognize the 'rootflags' tag? or Debian doesn't automatically deal with btrfs-subvolumes nicely?
Code:
Select allBegin: checking root file system . . . fsck from util-linux 2.25.2
/sbin/fsck.btrfs: BTRFS file system
mount: mounting PARTUUID=................................................................ on /root failed
Target filesystem doesn't have requested /sbin/init
is it possible? If I select btrfs as /boot partition I get this error:
"Bootable partitions cannot be on an btrfs filesystem"
edit:should I use this guide? [URL]
My goal ist to install Debian Jessie on a drive with a btrfs subvolume scheme. This is my first time using btrfs and also my first Jessie installation.
My experience is, that partman creates btrfs file systems but doesn´t support btrfs subvolumes (why not?).
I successfully created btrfs subvolumes manually in a shell session during ("expert") installation and manually mounted them to the desired mount points in /target. Installation went through until grub2 installation, which failed.
Is there a best practice to install Debian (Jessie) on a btrfs file system with subvolumes? I want to use subvolumes for /, /home, /var/log and /var/lib/mysql.
I'm just diving in to figuring out how to partition/utilise BTRFS.I am used to just installing with EXT4 and carving out a / and a /homeBut, from what I understand, this isn't the case with BTRFS?I know you have to create a separate /boot as grub doesn't support the file system.But, with BTRFS, we just create a / and /home and others would then just be subvolumes?What happens if I want to reinstall? I have liked being able to just wipe / and reinstall the OS, leaving my personal files in tact. Does this still happen if the /home is just a subvolume? Hopefully that makes sense
View 3 Replies View RelatedOkay, so I found a couple articles about the new BTRFS for Ubuntu that became available on 10.10, and I was wondering if some people could clear some stuff up for me. I am going to be upgrading my desktop box from 8.04 soon (I know,long time coming, but I had some hardware compatibility issues with recent releases that have been addressed on my end) I'm pretty new to a lot of these terms, so a detailed explanation would be awesome if you don't mind.
1 - Is this file system ready for the home user?
2 - Are there significant performance gains over ext4 and is it stable? If not now, will it be in the future?
3 - When a new subvolume is created, does that act like a partition? For instance, would a home folder in it's own subvolume act like home on a separate partition in the event of a reinstall or upgrade to the root filesystem? If not, what would be the specific advantages to using a subvolume?
4 - When creating a snapshot, is it bit for bit or a compressed image?
5 - Does compressing the root filesystem save a significant amount of disc space?
6 - Is there anything else that would be important to know about this filesystem?
If I have some things confused or misunderstood, it is because I am just starting to understand how some of the foundational stuff in my OS works
I decided to try playing with btrfs. I think you could do lots of fancy things with that. One thing puzzles me though - I can make a snapshot or a subvolume the default volume to mount (using btrfs set-default , but how do I then remove that subvolume default so that the base filesystem is the default mount again.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI upgraded my 9.10 installation to 10.04 and decided to try out btrfs on a some spare drives in the system.sudo mkfs.btrfs -m raid0 /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sddthe only way the system sees the btrfs array is by running btrfsctl -a and then mounting /dev/sdc. but that has to be done in userland, not at boot. if i try to mount it via fstab, ubuntu won't load because it can't find the mount point./dev/sdc /Images atasum,thread_pool=128,compress,rw,user 0 0so where am i going wrong? I tried mounting via the UUID also but that didn't seem to work for me either.
View 1 Replies View RelatedDuring the installation of Ubuntu 10.04 the partitioner was wrongfully configured to see a functioning btrfs partition as ext4 (without reformatting it). Thus the installation process got stuck at 5%.Installer was run again ignoring the btrfs partition.btrfs-tools was added to the new 10.04, but the btrfs partition is now recognized ast4 with lost+found folder on it.Tried to add the btrfs to etc/fstab as btrfs but t won't mount.Can the partition/filesystem type be changed so that this is actually recognized and mounted as btrfs, hoping my data is still on it somehow?
View 9 Replies View RelatedI will be installing Fedora 15 on my work laptop this weekend and am wondering: Could I use BTRFS as the default filesystem? Why or why not?
My default layout looks like this:
/boot
LVM
swap
/
/home
This would mean that all the LVM partitions would become BTRFS. Or maybe only the /home would become BTRFS.
Different threads state that you shouldn't use BTRFS yet on production systems, but there are also plans to include it in F16 as the default FS.
Why should (or shouldn't) I use BTRFS as opposed to EXT4?
I'm a big fan of ZFS on FreeBSD (I've been using it on my home server since before it got stable; bleeding edge, baby!) and I'd like to try out btrfs to see how that's evolving. Since it's still largely in development, none of the usual mainstream distros have btrfs as an option. I haven't used Linux in a bunch of years, so I don't really know what my best options are for giving btrfs a try.
View 2 Replies View RelatedWas wondering if it's possible to set up a single disk with btrfs and then later on convert it to a 'mirrored' array?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have installed Debian through the Debootstrap process using the ext4 fs for root and it worked without a problem. When I tried to install Debian mounted on btrfs subvolumes, there are problems mounting root while booting so it crashes... Any clue if Debian supports btrfs subvolumes?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI hear that the non-live version of F15 has an option to choose the btrfs filesystem. I only see the DVD version as a non-live version and it's 3.4 Gigs. Is there a non-live CD version available?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI'm currently running the XFCE Spin of Fedora 15 (Xedora, as I like to call it (; ) on 64 bit, so sometimes I need a 32 bit environment to try stuff out.
I recently installed Linux Mint on a partition formatted to btrfs, and this is where my problems start, as I have no idea how to add this installation to my existing GRUB configuration. The grub.cfg on the Mint partition looks like this (GRUB2 btw.):
Code:
#
# DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE
#
# It is automatically generated by grub-mkconfig using templates
# from /etc/grub.d and settings from /etc/default/grub
#
[Code].....
Currently have multiple small DNS-323 NAS-in-a-box that need to be replaced with a single storage server.
Since the setting is for an advanced home server (2-3 simultaneous clients max) that will hold movies and application/game ISO's, I was originally going to go with a simple RAID6 on freenas. As I learned about silent data corruption, and with a max of 3 simultaneous users, I don't see a need for a hardware raid processor. So I gathered that software RAIDZ (RAIDZ2) based on ZFS or BTRFS that prevent silent data corruption would be a better match (please correct me if I am wrong).
NEEDS: The needs (in addition to prevention of silent data corruption) are basically online capacity expansion (OCE), and 2+TB volumes (64bit LBA); with a preference for the ability to spin down idle drives. I'm going to make the assumption that any solution I go with will allow me to read/monitor actual SMART drive data.
STUMBLING BLOCK(S):
1. Would someone validate the (perhaps mistaken) assumption that since BTRFS is integrated into the latest Linux kernel, it is mature enough for NAS candidacy.
2. Please validate: Forward-compatibility of BTRFS has been stated (no need to reformat with subsequent BTRFS updates).
3. Am I missing any NAS software (open-source or otherwise) that would meet these requirements and provide a nice pretty graphical interface?
4. What software solution would you recommend? (btrfs on xxxxx? zfs-fuse? linux+xfs (+mdadm)? ..?)
5. What are my next steps?
Accumulated hardware for project:
SERVER: 3u chassis with 16hot swap trays. Tyan S5360G2NR i7520 mainboard. Single Intel 2.8Ghz CPU (dual-capable). 4GB ECC RAM (do i need more?). Dual hot-swappable 550W psu. CD-ROM
DRIVES: Eight 1.5Tb SATA drives, plus an additional four that are in-use in the DNS323 that I will migrate over using OCE. Four 750 SATA drives that are also in-use and can be migrated over via OCE. One 16Gb SATA SSD, intended for Boot OS and logs.
INTERFACE CARDS: Two 3Ware Escalade 9500S-8 8Port SATA RAID (PCI-X, 64bit) [can change these to something else].
UPS: 1500VA
I was interested in the idea of the btrfs subvolumes, so I made a virtual machine and installed Slackware as per the instructions here: [URL] It all went very well, but when I tried to switch from the huge kernel to the generic kernel and use the initrd.gz generated from step 29 (except that I used 2.6.37.4-smp instead of whatever's there) in lilo.conf, it failed to boot. I also noticed that in the instructions themselves, the poster doesn't actually add the initrd.gz to lilo.conf, so I'm guess the huge kernel has everything it needs to boot properly.
View 13 Replies View RelatedI've just bought a new SSD hard drive:Kingston SSDNow V-Series SNV125-S2/128GB 2.5'' 128GB SATA/300The question is which filesystem whould you recommand and why?BTRFS vs NILFS2 or EXT4?If you choose ext4 would you enable jurnalling?I'm very close to choose Btrfs.Any experience with running any of these on your SSD?
View 7 Replies View Relatedwhat do I have:2x 150GB drives (sda) on a raid card (raid 1)for the OS (slack 13.37)2x 2TB drives (sdb) on that same raid card (raid 1, too)2x 1.5TB drives (sdc,sdd) directly attached to MoBo2x 750GB drives (sde,sdf) attached to MoBo too.if i got about it the normal way, i'd create softRAID 1 out of the the 1.5TB and the 750GB drives and LVM all the data arrays (2TB+1.5TB+750GB) to get a unified disk.If I use btrfs will I be able to do the same? mean I have read how to create raid arrays with mkfs.btrfs and that some lvm capability is incorporated in the filesystem. but will it understand what I want it to do, if i just say
Code:
mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1 /dev/sde1 /dev/sdf1
probably not, eh?
Im using parted when doing a new disk. If the disk is ext[234], xfs, jfs, parted displays the partition correctly, but if the partition was formated using reiser4 or btrfs the "File System" part there is nothing, like there is no formating done to the partition.
This is how Im using parted:ex.: parted -s /dev/sda print
Does anyone knows a patch to fix this issue?
I want to convert the file system on my boot drive from ext4 to btrfs.
I have converted by 2nd drive, unsure of how to convert the boot drive and partitions.
Things were fine for a couple months until this most recent dist-upgrade. The new grub has an incompatibility with BTRFS which nearly caused me to lose everything, as grub couldn't set up the boot system since it can't see the BTRFS partition. I worked for days trying to get help in the linux-btrfs listserv, but they don't seem to understand Debian/Ubuntu, and they kept referring me to Debian and grub devs. I asked them how those devs will know any more about BTRFS than they do, but there was no reply.
They said the new grub (1.99~rc1-13) will fix it, but unfortunately the Debian package management system was jammed by BTRFS as well and I couldn't install/deinstall anything. I finally had to unpack the grub-pc .deb and manually install it, but guess what? It didn't fix the problem. I've now had to completely rebuild my system without BTRFS. This has cost me days, which I cannot spare. I realize it says 'experimental' on the BTRFS website, but it is in the stable kernel, and there is not a word anywhere about it being completely non-functional in Debian/Ubuntu.
In my efforts to resize my BTRFS Partition, I accidentally unmarked my BTRFS partition as being BTRFS, and can't mark it back as I can't find the numeric ID for BTRFS and how to apply.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI just did a fresh install of slack 13.1 on a separate drive to the one I was previously using. I've been having trouble getting lilo to work, so that I can choose between either drive. Lilo is currently installed to /dev/sda, with the old system on /dev/sda1 and the new installation on /dev/sdb1. I keep getting errors like these:
Code: Fatal: Trying to map files from unnamed device 0x0011 (NFS/RAID mirror down ?)
I managed to install lilo from the old system by copying the kernel image from the new system into the /boot/ directory and running lilo. I am now on the new system and trying the same thing in reverse but it isn't working. I have searched around a bit and there's a lot of talk of chroot-ing into the other partition to run lilo. I don't understand why the process isn't working both ways though. I can't run lilo on my new installation even with the two kernel images in the local /boot/ folder. Is this something to do with btrfs or am I missing something to do with lilo? This is my lilo.conf file. I am trying to run lilo using this file from my new installation on /dev/sdb1 and getting the error given above.
[Code]...
Package Installation error
Recently I get an error while installing any packages offline.
"Action would require the installation of packages from not authenticated source".
The key icon at top tight corner shows.
I'm trying to install Kubuntu 9.10 on my machine (I had the same problem with Kubuntu 9.04). The machine is:
- Core 2 Quad 6600
- Nvidia 7600 GS
- Two disk seagate 500 in mirroring raid software
When I try to install Kubuntu, after disk partition, my system dosn't see the CD. He tell me to insert disk into drive but I doesn't touch it. I resolved this mounting an external hard disk into /cdrom. After this, the installation continues until the step "select and install software". At this step, the installation procedure tell me an error. During this error, in the other console, I've this:
Code:
Jan 19 21:58:09 in-target: Alcuni pacchetti non possono essere installati. Questo può voler dire
Jan 19 21:58:09 in-target: che è stata richiesta una situazione impossibile oppure, se si sta
Jan 19 21:58:09 in-target: usando una distribuzione in sviluppo, che alcuni pacchetti richiesti
[Code]....
I have installed Debian maybe 30 times over the years since about 2003, stable, testing and Sid on two different desktops and two different laptops. The only problem I have ever had is sometimes with a flaky daily build. It is one of my favorite distros.
BUT, I am totally frustrated is trying to install to a USB. I have followed the manual step by step about 6 times in the past two weeks. The result is always the same. The installation fails to find an installation iso image. Yes, I know the iso image and the hd-media vmlinuz and initrd.gz files are supposed to be the same version.
File: debian-testing-i386-netinst.iso from: [url]
Files: vmlinuz and initrd.gz from: [url]
The USB boots to a Language selection screen and proceeds through the Keyboard selection screen with no problems.
The next step which searches for an installation iso image fails.
Skipping that step and trying to load installer components from iso image also fails.
Searching the entire PC for an installation iso image also fails. (I even copied the netinst iso image to the HD root directory.)
I'm trying to perform an install of F14 (fresh install over F13), and it has been showing "running post-installation scripts" for 1 1/2 hours now. I am wondering if this is unusual and what the implications might be of power-cycling and rebooting. I'd note this is a fairly fast machine with 2 quad-core Xeons (I forget their model number).
View 1 Replies View RelatedTrying to get Fedora 12 installed normally on a laptop, but it's hanging at the aforementioned point during installation. The mouse cursor is movable and the system appears to be fully working. The progress bar isn't moving and there is nowhere to either shut down the PC or access the terminal?? I cannot check any progress or see any log of what the installation program is trying to do.
It's a P4 laptop with ~700mb of ram. This is a fresh install from the i386 DVD distro. Why is it so hard to get a running system in linux when Windows or Mac is ready to go in about an hour? I've spent a good 3 hours trying to find my way around this latest problem and I am SO close to giving up. What a waste of my time linux has been so far.