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 6A0FD9F8B
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:16:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 60D4A26171
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:16:14 +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 id E69AD26168
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:16:13 +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 B641542E06;
Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:16:13 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <aa90594e-dfdf-fb03-c88c-a997360df084@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:16:13 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:100.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/100.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
=?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=c3=bcnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>,
Roland Sturm <r.sturm@cibex.net>
References: <360557907.5748.1651033823899@webmail.proxmox.com>
<1651044569.oo1skrc0qp.astroid@nora.none>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1651044569.oo1skrc0qp.astroid@nora.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.954 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
NICE_REPLY_A -1.857 Looks like a legit reply (A)
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] PBS File Retore for NTFS with deduplication enabled
leads to corrupted files
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, 27 Apr 2022 12:16:14 -0000
On 27.04.22 09:35, Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler wrote:
> users do report success with mapping + attaching the disk to an existin=
g=20
> (version-matching) windows VM for manual file-restoring, so we could=20
> also think whether it's possible to streamline this approach somehow=20
> ("attach disk RO from backup" on the PVE side?), since it's a lot more =
> flexible for other use cases as well (e.g., encrypted disks inside the =
> VM, storage management or FS we don't support in our file-restore VM,=20
> FS features that are not available in our file-restore VM kernel (yet o=
r=20
> anymore ;)), ..). obviously an advanced use case, and for simple cases =
> the existing file-restore approach is far nicer UX-wise.
IMO the better idea than using some other NTFS implementation, as there's=
no
free one that can support all newest features and details 100%.
This can also be useful in general, i.e., for other, more esoteric FS.