From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 962691FF16F
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Tue, 27 May 2025 09:30:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4AAE5DCB1;
	Tue, 27 May 2025 09:30:30 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 09:29:47 +0200
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20250520090818.44881-1-m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
 <20250520090818.44881-2-m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
 <b73eff40-1abb-45f5-971c-6cb3f805a67c@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <b73eff40-1abb-45f5-971c-6cb3f805a67c@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <mailman.37.1748331029.395.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
From: =?utf-8?q?Michael_K=C3=B6ppl_via_pve-devel?=
 <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Precedence: list
Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Michael_K=C3=B6ppl?= <m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
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/>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH container v6 1/4] fix #3711: lxc: print
 warning if storage for mounted volume does not exist anymore
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6426612896948756462=="
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>

--===============6426612896948756462==
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
X-Original-To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
Delivered-To: pve-devel@lists.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 43983C9054
	for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 27 May 2025 09:30:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1DD99DC97
	for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 27 May 2025 09:29:49 +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>; Tue, 27 May 2025 09:29:48 +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 4A18644562
	for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 27 May 2025 09:29:48 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <746f07c0-6038-44cd-9388-8445a8400069@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 09:29:47 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH container v6 1/4] fix #3711: lxc: print
 warning if storage for mounted volume does not exist anymore
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20250520090818.44881-1-m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
 <20250520090818.44881-2-m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
 <b73eff40-1abb-45f5-971c-6cb3f805a67c@proxmox.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Michael_K=C3=B6ppl?= <m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <b73eff40-1abb-45f5-971c-6cb3f805a67c@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
	AWL                     0.004 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  0.001 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  0.001 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  0.001 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

On 5/22/25 08:17, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> Am 20.05.25 um 11:08 schrieb Michael Köppl:
>> An explicit check for the existence of the storage is added to print a
>> warning and continue with the removal of the container without deleting
>> the mount point in case the storage does not exist anymore. For other
>> errors, the function should still die.
> 
> And something else, while this is IMO fine to do for now as stop-gap, it
> might be good to also improve the removal of storage entries, like e.g.,
> if the storage is still available then check if there are any volumes
> on the storage that our code recognizes, and if, prompt the user if they
> still want to remove the storage entry, as that would make those volumes
> unusable. Ideally we would join that info with them being actually used,
> like a disk in a VM.
> The same holds for jobs being defined that use that storage, like backup or
> replication (well that always works on guest disks, so that would be
> covered already).
> 
> For clarity: I do not suggest adding some "auto prune everything", that's
> a tad to dangerous in the storage config panel/api. Albeit some multi
> select + delete (and other operations that make sense, like move to other
> storage I guess) could be nice, that probably should go into the storage
> content UI/API.
> 
> Again, nothing wrong with this here, one can still always remove storage
> entries directly, and improving UX on such edge cases is always nice.

Thanks for having a look and for the feedback. I'd like to implement
some sort of multi-select solution as an extension to this, but as a
separate series. I have it on my TODO list, though, as the solution
implemented by this patch at least gives some warning, but it's
certainly not optimal.



--===============6426612896948756462==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel

--===============6426612896948756462==--