From: Marc Haber <mh+linux-btrfs@zugschlus.de>
To: linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Another ENOSPC situation
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 22:40:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160401204043.GN9342@torres.zugschlus.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPmG0jZVcer1dyqNeJx8FmQRXqC9vqQrcFv2e3wzGJD+uZkqLA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 09:20:52PM +0200, Henk Slager wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 6:50 PM, Marc Haber <mh+linux-btrfs@zugschlus.de> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 06:30:20PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 05:44:30PM +0200, Henk Slager wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Marc Haber <mh+linux-btrfs@zugschlus.de> wrote:
> >> > > btrfs balance -mprofiles seems to do something. one kworked and one
> >> > > btrfs-transaction process hog one CPU core each for hours, while
> >> > > blocking the filesystem for minutes apiece, which leads to the host
> >> > > being nearly unuseable up to the point of "clock and mouse pointer
> >> > > frozen for nearly ten minutes".
> >> >
> >> > I assume you still have your every 10 minutes snapshotting running
> >> > while balancing?
> >>
> >> No, I disabled the cronjob before trying the balance. I might be
> >> crazy, but not stup^wunexperienced.
> >
> > That being said, I would still expect the code not to allow _this_
> > kind of effect on the entire system when two alledgely incompatible
> > operations run simultaneously. I mean, Linux is a multi-user,
> > multi-tasking operating system where one simply cannot expect all
> > processes to be cooperative to each other. We have the operating
> > systems to prevent this kind of issues, not to cause them.
>
> Maybe look at it differently: Does user mh have trouble using this
> laptop w.r.t. storing files?
No. I would have cried murder otherwise.
> In openSUSE Tumbleweed (the snapshot from end of march), root access
> is needed to change the default snapshotting config, otherwise you
> will have a 10 year history. After that change has been done according
> to needs of the user, there is no need to run manual balance.
So you are saying the balancing a filesystem should never be
necessary? Or what are you trying to say?
Greetings
Marc
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Leimen, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 6224 1600421
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-01 20:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-01 13:40 Another ENOSPC situation Marc Haber
2016-04-01 15:44 ` Henk Slager
2016-04-01 16:30 ` Marc Haber
2016-04-01 16:50 ` Marc Haber
2016-04-01 19:20 ` Henk Slager
2016-04-01 20:40 ` Marc Haber [this message]
2016-04-01 23:39 ` Henk Slager
2016-04-02 4:55 ` Duncan
2016-04-02 5:43 ` Chris Murphy
2016-04-02 7:31 ` Duncan
2016-04-05 13:39 ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn
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=20160401204043.GN9342@torres.zugschlus.de \
--to=mh+linux-btrfs@zugschlus.de \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.