From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B03D51FF0AF
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Fri, 06 Nov 2026 14:05:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 635222162B;
	Fri, 06 Nov 2026 14:05:33 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2026 14:05:29 +0100
Message-Id: <DMO5EO7FA90G.2IULMOH2Y200M@proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH e2e-tests 26/38] tests: ceph: verify setting up a
 hyper-converged cluster
From: =?utf-8?q?Michael_K=C3=B6ppl?= <m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
To: "Kefu Chai" <k.chai@proxmox.com>, <m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
X-Mailer: aerc 0.22.0
References: <20261104190345.2573464-1-m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
 <20261104190345.2573464-27-m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
 <20261106125050.260435-1-k.chai@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20261106125050.260435-1-k.chai@proxmox.com>
X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2
X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1793970330003
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
	AWL                     0.208 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From:
 address
	DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
	KAM_DMARC_STATUS         0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict
 Alignment (newer systems)
	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
Message-ID-Hash: PLEYSVP27T3GGHLH6TJGO6SGI2HD3YJV
X-Message-ID-Hash: PLEYSVP27T3GGHLH6TJGO6SGI2HD3YJV
X-MailFrom: m.koeppl@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
CC: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:pve-devel-owner@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-join@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-leave@lists.proxmox.com>

On Fri Nov 6, 2026 at 1:50 PM CET, Kefu Chai wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
>> [snip]
>> +        create_pool($first, $pool, add_storages =3D> 1);
>> +
>> +        my $storage =3D $first->client()->get("/storage/$pool", {});
>> +        is($storage->{type}, 'rbd', "RBD storage '$pool' was added");
>> +        is($storage->{pool}, $pool, "storage '$pool' uses the new pool"=
);
>> [snip]
>
> Could we also check that the pool has size=3D3 and min_size=3D2?
> These are defaults set by the PVE pool creation API, so this would
> be a small sanity check that they reach Ceph correctly.

Thanks for pointing this out, will add it for v2!