fsck.btrfs in MM? Or not?

[fermier]

Re: fsck.btrfs in MM? Or not?

Great minds think alike!

Please do not complete the rest of that expression... :-)

At least this confirms that there must be some CPU involved in copying from ext4 to btrfs. I have found the same for copying from/to ext4 and ntfs-3g.

Yes, that's what you should do, and share the results and how to do it.

BTW, in case you didn't absorb it from your research, when you make a btrfs partition (either via installing the OS or using mkfs.btrfs), upon inspection you will learn that it has two UUIDs.

Oh dear! sounds like you have plans for my weekend... Was hoping to meet friends in Milano for the weekend instead.

Yes, this is the famous or infamous sub-volume mechanism from btrfs, which allows one to have several files systems on the same device. Urgh! I heartily dislike UUID's, especially if I have to use another program to discover what is what.

Thanks Snowhog for the quotes. Actually when I had read those pages on a previous occasion I found this like more interesting reading:

https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Gotchas

Now that the moderator links in other pages, I have less of a risk being flamed and thrashed for adding mine. :-)

Will keep you posted on my brtfs multi-volume experiments, but already this does not seem promising in the case of mismatched devices. I guess I shall limit my experiments to devices that are more closely matched.

l8r

[dibl]

Re: fsck.btrfs in MM? Or not?

Good link -- I had not found that one. Yes, it would appear the wise bunny will still use same-size drives for a RAID1 set, with btrfs. I'm planning to build a new system this winter -- this little experiment has provided some useful information for planning purposes. Maybe I'll use a mirrored pair of disks this time -- the hard drive prices are falling so fast, due to the improvements in SSDs. I could put my OS on an SSD, but I've got too many GB of data to think of an SSD for that (or multiple SSDs).

[Snowhog]

Re: fsck.btrfs in MM? Or not?

Thanks Snowhog for the quotes. Actually when I had read those pages on a previous occasion I found this like more interesting reading:

https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Gotchas

Now that the moderator links in other pages, I have less of a risk being flamed and thrashed for adding mine. :-)

Not here! As a Moderator, I encourage the use of external links, rather than posting long quotes. But, posting links to other 'points of view' if that is what you mean, isn't cause for concern here. KFN is not like other forums. We don't tolerate out right profanity or personal attacks on other members, but other than that, we are open and welcoming. Just because we are fanatical (what, we aren't?) about Kubuntu doesn't mean that we don't entertain other points of view.

[dibl]

Re: fsck.btrfs in MM? Or not?

To semi-finish this thread, over the weekend I found that Parted Magic Ver. 5.7 (with updated libparted file versions) does recognize the btrfs partitions, and will run fsck on them from a Live CD or Live USB stick.