What I want:

To boot into a BTRFS snapshots from rEFind boot manager.

Additional Info:

1. So, apparently, to restore the BTRFS snapshot of a root subvolume, I shouldn't do it with the root partition being actively used.

2. So, I need to boot into the desired snapshot from the boot manager itself.

3. GRUB has grub-btrfs, which lets you boot into snapshot from OS selection screen itself.

4. rEFInd has refind-btrfs, which should do the same as grub-btrfs. But it didn't in my case. I am not seeing any way to boot into a snapshot from rEFInd.

5. I use BTRFS Assistant with snapper to manage snapshots.

6. I am not seeing any way to restore the snapshot from live environment too.

7. I am using CachyOS (Arch) with Plasma DE.

8. I suspect the reason is my unusual /efi /boot partition layout. (attached below)

9. I did my partition this way because, my initial EFI partition had less sto

I'm using CachyOS (Arch) with BTRFS. And tried to restore snap of root subvolume and it didn't work ( see previous post ).

If I remember correctly, i successfully restored root subvolume before. Take it with a grain of salt.

Some people on my previos posts said that I shouldn't have tried restore root subvol while system is actively running through the subvol.

Now my question is,

How to restore a snap of root subvolume ?

Edit: I know how to restore a snapshot. Just need help with root subvol snapshot.

I use BTRFS Assistant with snapper. And rEFInd doens't have boot to snapshot option. (I installed and it didn't work )

Context: I updated my CachyOS (Arch) BTRFS system. Some new things caused few problems especially brave browser(missing tabs), some icons missing.

So I wanted to go back to previous snapshot.

What I did: I first restored my home subvol which I saved before update. I worked.

Then I tried to restored my root partition. This is where I got the problem.

I got this error.

I would really appreciate URGENT help

If you need any more details I can provide.

EDIT

1. I used BTRFS Assistant to restore the root partition. And I did it while the OS is running.

( I previously did that and got no issues )

2. I pressed crtl+d and got 👇🏽

![](https://lazysoci.al/api/v3/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Flemmy.ml%2Fapi%2Fv3%2Fimage_proxy%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%2

Josef Bacik who was working on this said:

I fixed up all your review comments, but yes we don't care about this internally anymore so it's been de-prioritized. I have to rebase onto the new stuff, re-run tests, fix any bugs that may have creeped in, but the current code addressed all of your comments. Once I get time to get back to this you'll have a new version in your inbox, but that may be some time.

(Note: This was back in April.)

Let's say i made 10 snapshots on top of the base.

Now can i delete snap no. 5? Will the snaps after 5 will be affected?

Solved

Yes, one can delete consecutive snapshots. The data won't be deleted unless all snaps ( reference points ) get deleted.

Note: If you delete the original file and delete all the snapshots made when the file is still there, the file will get deleted permanently.

Can I change the location of BTRFS snapshots. I installed CachyOS, and it automatically setup BTRFS subvols.

This is the layout 👇

According to Arch wiki https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Snapper#Creating_a_new_configuration

Hi! I'm learning how to use btrfs and I need some advice.

One one of my desktop, I made the mistake of creating 2 partitions, one for /(root) and one for home. Both are btrfs. I didn't know that I could use subvolumes so that they could share the same physical space.

My question: How can I merge the root and home btrfs partitions into only 1 partition that would use btrfs subvolumes?

I'm looking for something like that:

• Partition1 (btrfs)
  • subvolume 1: @root (mounted to /)
  • subvolume 2: @home (mounted to /home)
• Partition 2, 3, 4...

My current setup:

• 1 physical hard drive (1 TB), shown as sda below
• The partitions I want to merge are sda7 and sda8
• That computer is an iMac also running MacOS so it has a few other partitions that I should not touch

 undefined

    
$ lsblk
NAME   MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINTS
sda      8:0    0 931,5G  0 disk 
├─sda1   8:1    0   200M  0 part /boot/efi
├─sda2   8:2    0 371,1G  0 part 
├─sda3   8:3    0 619,9M  
  

Hi,

there are mostly stabilization, refactoring and cleanup changes. There rest are minor performance optimizations due to caching or lock contention reduction and a few notable fixes.

Please pull, thanks.

Performance improvements:

• minor speedup in logging when repeatedly allocated structure is preallocated only once, improves latency and decreases lock contention
• minor throughput increase (+6%), reduced lock contention after clearing delayed allocation bits, applies to several common workload types
• skip full quota rescan if a new relation is added in the same transaction

Fixes:

• zstd fix for inline compressed file in subpage mode, updated version from the 6.8 time
• proper qgroup inheritance ioctl parameter validation
• more fiemap followup fixes after reduced locking done in 6.8
  • fix race when detecting delalloc ranges

Core changes:

• more debugging code
  • added assertions for a very rare crash in raid56 calculation
  • tree-checker dumps page state to g

cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/9319044

Hey,

I am planning to implement authenticated boot inspired from Pid Eins' blog. I'll be using pam mount for /home/user. I need to check integrity of all partitions.

I have been using luks+ext4 till now. I am hesistant hesitant to switch to zfs/btrfs, afraid I might fuck up. A while back I accidently purged '/' trying out timeshift which was my fault.

Should I use zfs/btrfs for /home/user? As for root, I'm considering luks+(zfs/btrfs) to be restorable to blank state.

Hello,

I have an issue with btrfs I can't really make heads or tails of. I thought I'd try lemmy even if the community is small here (I refuse to go back to the hard-R place).

Recently, my machine seemingly froze, after which I force reset. After booting back up, the journal shows that the scrub failed for the last boot. One interesting note was the tty1 console showed that the kernel had a SIGILL(?), but I didnt catch it, as switching vts one more time froze the machine completely after switching back to X.

Kernel: Archlinux Linux novo 6.6.8-arch1-1 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Thu, 21 Dec 2023 19:01:01 +0000 x86_64 GNU/Linux

I only have a vague idea of what chunk maps are and I have no idea on how to figure out if I lost data.

Running btrfs inspect-internal logical-resolve / gives ENOENT for any of the unfound chunk map logicals in the output.

Any help highly appreciated :)

The dmesg output is following:

 undefined

    
Jan 02 02:21:19 novo.vcpu kernel: BTRFS info (device nvme0n1p4): balance
  

The fscrypt work continues to steadily plod along, really hoping that there won't need to be many more version of the patchset, especially seeing as a bunch of the non-BTRFS-specific work has already landed.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/4577666

Was looking at how to set up snapper on Fedora 39 and came across the ever knowledgable Stephens tech talks video. It does balance, setting up snapper, sub-volume management in a really cool GUI tool.

edit updated the link as the GitHub page was apparently ood, but it is in most repo's

Looks like it's v2 time.

The btrfs-progs -side patch is here.

Just wanted to share some love for this filesystem.

I’ve been running a btrfs raid1 continuously for over ten years, on a motley assortment of near-garbage hard drives of all different shapes and sizes. None of the original drives are still in it, and that server is now on its fourth motherboard. The data has survived it all!

It’s grown to 6 drives now, and most recently survived the runtime failure of a SATA controller card that four of them were attached to. After replacing it, I was stunned to discover that the volume was uncorrupted and didn’t even require repair.

So knock on wood — I’m not trying to tempt fate here. I just want to say thank you to all the devs for their hard work, and add some positive feedback to the heap since btrfs gets way more than it’s fair share of flak, which I personally find to be undeserved. Cheers!