From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <c.ebner@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62805B965D for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:59:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 475D914FE4 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:59:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:59:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5F8FE4511E for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:59:56 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:59:55 +0100 (CET) From: Christian Ebner <c.ebner@proxmox.com> To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>, Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> Message-ID: <1720255851.3759.1702292395719@webmail.proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <29aa81de-aa7b-4246-8d4e-9f7c1e566435@proxmox.com> References: <20231206113101.139743-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com> <1776013681.1933.1701871754440@webmail.proxmox.com> <309156804.2067.1701873818090@webmail.proxmox.com> <71ea3a06-bc6a-48b4-8677-0fe78f0176d2@proxmox.com> <601801125.3576.1702287856240@webmail.proxmox.com> <29aa81de-aa7b-4246-8d4e-9f7c1e566435@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.6-Rev55 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.057 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH v3 proxmox-backup] ui: warn of missing gc-schedule, prune/verify jobs X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>, <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>, <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 10:59:57 -0000 > On 11.12.2023 11:43 CET Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> wrote: > > > I'd just use the daily timer which we use for sending out notifications about > available apt updates. > > I.e., just some fixed-scheduled daily health checking, that, e.g., can be > configured in the nodes' config, but only some params like the low-water > mark for when to send the alert. Okay, will integrate a low storage space datastore sanity check and prune + gc-schedule verification there, sending a notification if the configured threshold is reached. > > We use that also in PVE, i.e., we do not check for specific VMIDs as there access > is covered by what the API returns anyway, the overall datastore list would be > the same, but what one can do within not, so yeah Datastore.Audit might not have > been the best example here. Thanks for the feedback! Cheers, Chris