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 C56251FF142 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2026 13:38:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8D1F61E60D; Mon, 2 Mar 2026 13:39:46 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2026 13:39:12 +0100 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH ha-manager] resources: Expand max_restart option From: "Daniel Kral" To: "Maximiliano Sandoval" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0-38-g7088c3642f2c-dirty References: <20260302122831.319795-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20260302122831.319795-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1772455129901 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -1.034 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 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.012 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 1.188 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.93 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. 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: WH4TGFYBWC5Y2OUNVZDWBMEORDAU726U X-Message-ID-Hash: WH4TGFYBWC5Y2OUNVZDWBMEORDAU726U X-MailFrom: d.kral@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 VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon Mar 2, 2026 at 1:28 PM CET, Maximiliano Sandoval wrote: > When read next to `max_relocate` it is not clear which happens first > after a service fails to start. > > Signed-off-by: Maximiliano Sandoval > --- > > When writting I initially had "When reached, the service will be attempte= d to be > relocated" since it was clear it had to be on a "node" but as per HA rule= s not > all of them might be eligible or some of them might already have reached = the > max_restart limit. Looks good to me! Consider this as: Reviewed-by: Daniel Kral > > src/PVE/HA/Resources.pm | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/src/PVE/HA/Resources.pm b/src/PVE/HA/Resources.pm > index 68d9d16..66dd7b4 100644 > --- a/src/PVE/HA/Resources.pm > +++ b/src/PVE/HA/Resources.pm > @@ -73,7 +73,8 @@ EODESC > }, > max_restart =3D> { > description =3D> "Maximal number of tries to restart the ser= vice on" > - . " a node after its start failed.", > + . " a node after its start failed. When reached, the ser= vice will be attempted to" > + . " be relocated on an eligible node.", > type =3D> 'integer', > optional =3D> 1, > default =3D> 1,