From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27DD01FF0B3 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2026 14:38:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A26D521693; Wed, 11 Nov 2026 14:38:32 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <6dfafc05-c75c-42a5-ae0d-a57e0a503368@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2026 14:38:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH proxmox-backup 0/4] fix 7333 use multiple tape drives for restoring To: Jakob-Tobias Winter , pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20261106133826.1692620-2-tobias@stuttgart.de> Content-Language: en-US From: Dominik Csapak In-Reply-To: <20261106133826.1692620-2-tobias@stuttgart.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1794404309237 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.309 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: URP6NDQS7F5K4RCVKJXTJY65IG42U4KJ X-Message-ID-Hash: URP6NDQS7F5K4RCVKJXTJY65IG42U4KJ X-MailFrom: d.csapak@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: after looking through the patches, i have some open points: (i hinted at them in my previous answer a bit) - we should make sure that only drives from the same changer can be selected via the gui and api - imo it does not make sense to expose this to standalone drives, this would be a rather niche setup (we can still expose this there later), not sure how tricky that would be to implement in the drives drop down though, maybe another ui element would be better? e.g. a changer or standalone dropdown and if one selects a changer display a grid with checkboxes for the drives? for the start a normal multiselect dropdown would be enough though...