From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10AF61FF16B for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2026 09:56:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D335513EAB; Mon, 27 Apr 2026 09:56:14 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <7ed83642-7455-4a39-91e9-fb5646bb331c@proxmox.com> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2026 09:56:00 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta Subject: Re: applied: [PATCH proxmox-backup] sync: pull: use LogLineSender in d SyncSourceReader To: Christian Ebner , Thomas Lamprecht , pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260424133613.3135956-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Dominik Csapak In-Reply-To: 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: 1777276475933 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -1.250 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 ENA_SUBJ_ODD_CASE 2.6 Subject has odd case 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: X6PSW322DVL2SR2DIVC6TWQSXGQ3C4MM X-Message-ID-Hash: X6PSW322DVL2SR2DIVC6TWQSXGQ3C4MM 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: On 4/27/26 8:35 AM, Christian Ebner wrote: > On 4/26/26 11:38 PM, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: >> Am 24.04.26 um 15:35 schrieb Dominik Csapak: >>> otherwise some log messages are not rendered with the correct prefix >>> when using multiple worker threads. >>> >>> For example: >>> >>> Snapshot ct/122/2026-04-24T12:56:17Z: got backup log file >>> client.log.blob >>> >>> vs >>> >>> [ct/122]: Snapshot ct/122/2026-04-24T13:00:02Z: got backup log file >>> client.log.blob >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak >>> --- >>> there may be other places where we don't use the LogLineSender here, >>> but could not find any on first glance. >>> >> I know you were a bit earlier, but I chose Chris variant as the rest >> of his fixes of his series was a bit more crucial [0], might be still >> great if one of you could cross-check to ensure nothing was missed. >> >> Marking this still as applied here because if effectively should be >> addressed, and thus mail filters used mark it as obsolete. Should I have >> missed something here then it would needs a new submission that was >> rebased on master anyway >> >> [0]: https://lore.proxmox.com/pbs-devel/20260425140927.928214-3- >> c.ebner@proxmox.com/ > > Double checked: Dominiks patch did also cover the 'skip because vanished > since start of sync' log message, which was not covered by my patches. yep, just sent a new patch for that: https://lore.proxmox.com/pbs-devel/20260427075509.776694-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com/T/#u