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 613621FF132 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2026 11:51:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4212F16EFD; Mon, 27 Apr 2026 11:51:15 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <744e7fed-3787-4bf8-b550-0a2f5f9c5bb3@proxmox.com> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2026 11:51:10 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox-backup] api/tools: avoid showing error on missing manifest during file listing To: =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= , pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260426080346.159579-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com> <1777281748.vnn3diw30o.astroid@yuna.none> Content-Language: en-US, de-DE From: Christian Ebner In-Reply-To: <1777281748.vnn3diw30o.astroid@yuna.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1777283376211 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.071 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 Message-ID-Hash: 7EUP4X2YP5J5FTKK2MB5MXY7HV67X7D3 X-Message-ID-Hash: 7EUP4X2YP5J5FTKK2MB5MXY7HV67X7D3 X-MailFrom: c.ebner@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: On 4/27/26 11:22 AM, Fabian Grünbichler wrote: > On April 26, 2026 10:03 am, Christian Ebner wrote: >> When listing the contents of a datastore, a missing manifest blob >> file is currently being logged as error to the systemd journal [0]. >> The manifest missing is however normal operation in case of a still >> ongoing backup. Therefore, refactor the code such that a missing >> manifest is not treated as regular error by returning an Option::None >> in the read_backup_index() helper, and handle this case accordingly. >> >> The actual check for the missing manifest should further be improved, >> but requires a more in depth refactoring, the changes here acting as >> a stop gap for not showing the benign error the time being. > > how about the following instead? only log the error if the manifest file > has existed before we tried to load and parse it? that should limit the > log spam to > - actually broken manifests > - manifests which disappear right between those two calls > That has one major downside though: This is a highly critical code path, the content listing having already been reworked quite a bit int the past to not be slow. So your suggested changes would now unconditionally add more syscalls and IO? I think it would be better to refactor the code in the long run, so a missing manifest would be treated differently from parsing and other IO errors, and bubbled up to the call site for logging.