From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@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)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F35799513B for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 20:07:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CA676363C3 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 20:07:12 +0200 (CEST) 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)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 20:07:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CB04444B02 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 20:07:11 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <78415bc5-12bc-400e-9734-ee89023c4e72@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 20:07:10 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> References: <20240411092943.57377-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20240411092943.57377-10-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-GB From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20240411092943.57377-10-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [common.pm] Subject: [pve-devel] applied: Re: [PATCH guest-common v3 09/22] vzdump: schema: add fleecing property string X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 18:07:13 -0000 On 11/04/2024 11:29, Fiona Ebner wrote: > It's a property string, because that avoids having an implicit > "enabled" as part of a 'fleecing-storage' property. And there likely > will be more options in the future, e.g. threshold/limit for the > fleecing image size. > > Storage is non-optional, so the storage choice needs to be a conscious > decision. Can allow for a default later, when a good choice can be > made further down the stack. The original idea with "same storage as > VM disk" is not great, because e.g. for LVM, it would require the same > size as the disk up front. > > Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> > --- > src/PVE/VZDump/Common.pm | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+) > > applied, but massaged in having the whitespace on the continued line for multi-line strings, not on the previous (we should actually add that to the style guide), thanks!