From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9E5D1FF15C for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 14:04:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 06D9C16C81; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 14:05:50 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 14:05:16 +0200 From: Wolfgang Bumiller To: Fabian =?utf-8?Q?Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= Message-ID: <462wxssozvkhitezmmu3bjymsumjnfohqz37n6kj3mvqcqxnhs@qozvjtnngas3> References: <20250729111557.136012-1-w.bumiller@proxmox.com> <20250729111557.136012-9-w.bumiller@proxmox.com> <1753866745.g9x7g1ei7p.astroid@yuna.none> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1753866745.g9x7g1ei7p.astroid@yuna.none> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1754654692474 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.076 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 Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH storage 08/26] prepare for vm-vol and ct-vol content and vtypes X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 11:14:50AM +0200, Fabian Gr=FCnbichler wrote: > On July 29, 2025 1:15 pm, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote: > > Prepares the stoplevel PVE::Storage API updates as well as adding the > > new vtype subdirs to the base plugin's vtype subdir hash. > > = > > The new types are "vm-vol" and "ct-vol". They represent VM and > > container volumes, respectively. The "images" and "rootdir" types are > > considered legacy/deprecated, as the "rootdir" type was not properly > > used, and container volumes were technically of type "images", with > > the "rootdir" case "hacked in" by checking the existing VMs. > > = > > To more easily transition, the "images" type is now also a "supertype" > > of "vm-vol", and the "rootdir" type a "supertype" of "ct-vol". > > = > > - `get_images_dir()` is replaced by `get_vm_volume_dir()` > > - `get_private_dir()` is dropped as it is an openvz leftover > > - `get_ct_volume_dir()` is added its stead > > = > > We now also unify the vtypes and content types. As such, > > `content-dirs` can now include separate dirs for `vm-vol` and > > `ct-vol`. > > This is now also taken into account in `path_to_volume_id()` which > > tries to match file system paths to a storage and content type. > > = > > The following subs also get a $vtype parameter: > > - `vdisk_alloc()` > = > alloc requires it > = > > - `vdisk_clone()` > > - `volume_import()` > = > these two don't. should we make vdisk_clone also require it? or should > we remove it altogether and always use the vtype of the base volume? While we'd end up with a mix of 'images' an 'vm-vol' volumes in the linked clones, I think that's still better than sticking with 'images' forever there. > = > for import we probably want to make it optional for now to support old > nodes triggering it.. Yeah it's pretty much always optional (except for alloc) _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel