All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Davies <btrfs-list@steev.me.uk>
To: kreijack@inwind.it
Cc: Zygo Blaxell <ce3g8jdj@umail.furryterror.org>,
	John Petrini <john.d.petrini@gmail.com>,
	John Petrini <me@johnpetrini.com>,
	linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Filesystem Went Read Only During Raid-10 to Raid-6 Data Conversion
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 09:57:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20a7c0211b2d9336b69d48fa5c3d0c5c@steev.me.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f7771864-9503-646d-dbda-63a43844d230@inwind.it>

On 2020-07-21 21:48, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> On 7/21/20 12:15 PM, Steven Davies wrote:
>> On 2020-07-20 18:57, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
>>> On 7/18/20 12:36 PM, Steven Davies wrote:

>>>>>> /dev/sdf, ID: 12
>>>>>>     Device size:             9.10TiB
>>>>>>     Device slack:              0.00B
>>>>>>     Data,RAID10:           784.31GiB
>>>>>>     Data,RAID10:             4.01TiB
>>>>>>     Data,RAID10:             3.34TiB
>>>>>>     Data,RAID6:            458.56GiB
>>>>>>     Data,RAID6:            144.07GiB
>>>>>>     Data,RAID6:            293.03GiB
>>>>>>     Metadata,RAID10:         4.47GiB
>>>>>>     Metadata,RAID10:       352.00MiB
>>>>>>     Metadata,RAID10:         6.00GiB
>>>>>>     Metadata,RAID1C3:        5.00GiB
>>>>>>     System,RAID1C3:         32.00MiB
>>>>>>     Unallocated:            85.79GiB
>>>>> 
>>> [...]
>>>> 
>>>> RFE: improve 'dev usage' to show these details.
>>>> 
>>>> As a user I'd look at this output and assume a bug in btrfs-tools 
>>>> because of the repeated conflicting information.
>>> 
>>> What would be the expected output ?
>>> What about the example below ?
>>> 
>>>  /dev/sdf, ID: 12
>>>      Device size:             9.10TiB
>>>      Device slack:              0.00B
>>>      Data,RAID10:           784.31GiB
>>>      Data,RAID10:             4.01TiB
>>>      Data,RAID10:             3.34TiB
>>>      Data,RAID6[3]:         458.56GiB
>>>      Data,RAID6[5]:         144.07GiB
>>>      Data,RAID6[7]:         293.03GiB
>>>      Metadata,RAID10:         4.47GiB
>>>      Metadata,RAID10:       352.00MiB
>>>      Metadata,RAID10:         6.00GiB
>>>      Metadata,RAID1C3:        5.00GiB
>>>      System,RAID1C3:         32.00MiB
>>>      Unallocated:            85.79GiB
>> 
>> That works for me for RAID6. There are three lines for RAID10 too - 
>> what's the difference between these?
> 
> The differences is the number of the disks involved. In raid10, the
> first 64K are on the first disk, the 2nd 64K are in the 2nd disk and
> so until the last disk. Then the n+1 th 64K are again in the first
> disk... and so on.. (ok I missed the RAID1 part, but I think the have
> giving the idea )
> 
> So the chunk layout depends by the involved number of disk, even if
> the differences is not so dramatic.

Is this information that the user/sysadmin needs to be aware of in a 
similar manner to the original problem that started this thread? If not 
I'd be tempted to sum all the RAID10 chunks into one line (each for data 
and metadata).

>>>     Data,RAID6:        123.45GiB
>>>         /dev/sda     12.34GiB
>>>         /dev/sdb     12.34GiB
>>>         /dev/sdc     12.34GiB
>>>     Data,RAID6:        123.45GiB
>>>         /dev/sdb     12.34GiB
>>>         /dev/sdc     12.34GiB
>>>         /dev/sdd     12.34GiB
>>>         /dev/sde     12.34GiB
>>>         /dev/sdf     12.34GiB
>> 
>> Here there would need to be something which shows what the difference 
>> in the RAID6 blocks is - if it's the chunk size then I'd do the same 
>> as the above example with e.g. Data,RAID6[3].
> 
> We could add a '[n]' for the profile where it matters, e.g. raid0,
> raid10, raid5, raid6.
> What do you think ?

So like this? That would make sense to me, as long as the meaning of [n] 
is explained in --help or the manpage.
      Data,RAID6[3]:     123.45GiB
          /dev/sda     12.34GiB
          /dev/sdb     12.34GiB
          /dev/sdc     12.34GiB
      Data,RAID6[5]:     123.45GiB
          /dev/sdb     12.34GiB
          /dev/sdc     12.34GiB
          /dev/sdd     12.34GiB
          /dev/sde     12.34GiB
          /dev/sdf     12.34GiB

-- 
Steven Davies

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-23  8:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-14 16:13 Filesystem Went Read Only During Raid-10 to Raid-6 Data Conversion John Petrini
2020-07-15  1:18 ` Zygo Blaxell
     [not found]   ` <CADvYWxcq+-Fg0W9dmc-shwszF-7sX+GDVig0GncpvwKUDPfT7g@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]     ` <20200716042739.GB8346@hungrycats.org>
2020-07-16 13:37       ` John Petrini
     [not found]         ` <CAJix6J9kmQjfFJJ1GwWXsX7WW6QKxPqpKx86g7hgA4PfbH5Rpg@mail.gmail.com>
2020-07-16 22:57           ` Zygo Blaxell
2020-07-17  1:11             ` John Petrini
2020-07-17  5:57               ` Zygo Blaxell
2020-07-17 22:54                 ` John Petrini
2020-07-18 10:36                 ` Steven Davies
2020-07-20 17:57                   ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2020-07-21 10:15                     ` Steven Davies
2020-07-21 20:48                       ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2020-07-23  8:57                         ` Steven Davies [this message]
2020-07-23 19:29                           ` 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=20a7c0211b2d9336b69d48fa5c3d0c5c@steev.me.uk \
    --to=btrfs-list@steev.me.uk \
    --cc=ce3g8jdj@umail.furryterror.org \
    --cc=john.d.petrini@gmail.com \
    --cc=kreijack@inwind.it \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=me@johnpetrini.com \
    /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.