From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.ebner@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 83A39843A
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 21 Jun 2023 12:53:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4A2E31BCAE
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 21 Jun 2023 12:53:25 +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
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 21 Jun 2023 12:53:24 +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 98ADC4216E
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 21 Jun 2023 12:53:24 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <b257fb59-d33b-9ed1-35db-14939b48f2f7@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 12:53:20 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.12.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
References: <20230619092937.604628-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230619092937.604628-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.046 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
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: [pve-devel] applied-series: [PATCH v5 qemu-server 0/7] migration:
 don't scan all storages, fail on aliases
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 10:53:55 -0000

Am 19.06.23 um 11:29 schrieb Aaron Lauterer:
> This patch series changes the behavior during guest migrations:
> 
> Don't scan all storages for potential images belonging to the guest.
> Only migrate images referenced in the config.
> This made it necessary to handle pending changes explicitly which had
> been covered by the storage scan.
> 
> We also added checks for any aliased volids and fail the migration if
> detected.
> 
> The qemu-server part consists of quite a lot more commits since we had
> to change a few things and for a better history, they are mostly their
> own patches.
> 
> There is also a small patch for the documentation to add a hint that
> aliased storages should be avoided.
> 
> 
applied the series, thanks! Added follow-ups for my nits and found one
issue with qcow2 cloudinit disk and pushed a fix (the check for
with_snapshots was only done after the cdrom check which would return
early).