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 936F562860
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 16:35:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8112A1A86B
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 16:35:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [212.186.127.180])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id AD85E1A85F
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 16:35:01 +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 73C1745996
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 16:35:01 +0200 (CEST)
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com>
References: <20200930141601.27233-1-s.reiter@proxmox.com>
 <20200930141601.27233-2-s.reiter@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <9c7a8d82-3e19-a9bd-d0e4-b1aec6ef092c@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 16:35:00 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:82.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/82.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200930141601.27233-2-s.reiter@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.161 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 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
 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
 information. [environment.rs]
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH v2 proxmox-backup 1/5] backup: don't
 validate chunk existance if base was recently verified
X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 14:35:33 -0000

On 30.09.20 16:15, Stefan Reiter wrote:
> If the base was successfully verified within the last 7 days, we assume=

> that it is okay and all chunks exist, so we don't have to check.
>=20
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com>
> ---
>=20
> v2:
> * use proxmox::tools::time
>=20
>  src/api2/backup/environment.rs | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>=20
> diff --git a/src/api2/backup/environment.rs b/src/api2/backup/environme=
nt.rs
> index d515bf30..a8c9ddb4 100644
> --- a/src/api2/backup/environment.rs
> +++ b/src/api2/backup/environment.rs
> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ use std::collections::HashMap;
>  use ::serde::{Serialize};
>  use serde_json::{json, Value};
> =20
> -use proxmox::tools::digest_to_hex;
> +use proxmox::tools::{digest_to_hex, time};
>  use proxmox::tools::fs::{replace_file, CreateOptions};
>  use proxmox::api::{RpcEnvironment, RpcEnvironmentType};
> =20
> @@ -457,6 +457,32 @@ impl BackupEnvironment {
>          Ok(())
>      }
> =20
> +    fn last_backup_has_recent_verify(&self) -> Result<bool, Error> {
> +        match &self.last_backup {
> +            Some(last_backup) =3D> {
> +                let last_dir =3D &last_backup.backup_dir;
> +                let (manifest, _) =3D self.datastore.load_manifest(las=
t_dir)?;
> +                let verify =3D manifest.unprotected["verify_state"].cl=
one();
> +                match serde_json::from_value::<Option<SnapshotVerifySt=
ate>>(verify) {
> +                    Ok(verify) =3D> match verify {
> +                        Some(verify) =3D> {
> +                            let mut cutoff =3D time::TmEditor::with_ep=
och(time::epoch_i64(), false)?;
> +                            cutoff.add_days(-7)?;
> +                            let cutoff =3D cutoff.into_epoch()?;

why not just use time::epoch_i64(), avoiding a conversion to tm just
to convert it back, this is no time critical check, if there's a leap
second or something like that.

IMO, below is just more simple and everyone still gets whats meant..

let cutoff =3D time::epoch_i64() - 7 * 24 * 60 * 60;
Ok(verify.state =3D=3D VerifyState::Ok && verify.upid.starttime > cutoff)=


(but please, if you agree, do not send a v3 with the full series, this ca=
n
stand as it's own patch - out of the series)