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 EF45361E23 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 18:52:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id ED46321E91 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 18:52:09 +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)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id D521521E85 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 18:52:08 +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 A0ADF45EDC for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 18:52:08 +0200 (CEST) To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> References: <20201022103017.19715-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> Message-ID: <d793c85f-f392-bcc2-a7cc-a7a185887cb5@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 18:52:04 +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: <20201022103017.19715-1-f.ebner@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 -0.497 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment 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. [backupinfo.pm, backup.pm, vzdump.pm] URIBL_SBL 0.644 Contains an URL's NS IP listed in the Spamhaus SBL blocklist [backup.pm] URIBL_SBL_A 0.1 Contains URL's A record listed in the Spamhaus SBL blocklist [backup.pm] Subject: [pve-devel] applied-partially: [PATCH-SERIES v2 manager] Make backup with IDs for non-existent guests visibly fail 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: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 16:52:10 -0000 On 22.10.20 12:30, Fabian Ebner wrote: > #1 and #2 are just cleanups >=20 > #3 and #4 make the necessary changes for the improved behavior > by ensuring that exec_backup_task will cleanly fail when there > is no plugin specified, and then including the orphaned IDs > without assigning them a plugin. This is closer to the behavior > of PVE 6.0 and ensures that the backup task is marked as failed, > and the mail notification includes an error for the orphaned IDs. >=20 > #5 ensures that the IDs are still numerically ordered when there > are non-existing guests >=20 > #6 and #7 are minor improvements and can be applied independently >=20 > #8 is an RFC and changes the data structure returned by get_included_gu= ests >=20 >=20 > Changes from v1: > * everything, as the approach is different >=20 >=20 > Fabian Ebner (8): > remove unused variable > remove out-of-date comment > only use plugin after truthiness check > backup: include IDs for non-existent guests > order guest IDs numerically in exec_backup > sort the skip list numerically > simplify get_included_vmids function > don't group by node in get_included_guests >=20 > PVE/API2/Backup.pm | 23 ++-- > PVE/API2/BackupInfo.pm | 18 +--- > PVE/API2/VZDump.pm | 19 +++- > PVE/VZDump.pm | 68 +++++++----- > test/vzdump_guest_included_test.pl | 163 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---= > 5 files changed, 212 insertions(+), 79 deletions(-) >=20 applied all but the RFC, not for any specific reason but I had to cut an= release, thanks!