From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <d.csapak@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 772696124B
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 11:09:25 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7530F2FF77
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 11:09:25 +0100 (CET)
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 CC00E2FF6B
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 11:09:24 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A334444FB2;
Fri, 4 Feb 2022 11:09:24 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <06030899-49e4-7ad0-ea70-8c2bf2dd2dd7@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2022 11:09:23 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:97.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/97.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20220204091221.1781533-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
<20220204091221.1781533-2-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
<c34959fc-b499-4452-45c1-f3f5982cbf5d@proxmox.com>
From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <c34959fc-b499-4452-45c1-f3f5982cbf5d@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.161 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 -0.001 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
T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 2/2] traffic-control: add
debug log when we found a matching rule
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: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 10:09:25 -0000
On 2/4/22 11:05, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> On 04.02.22 10:12, Dominik Csapak wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
>> ---
>> optional, at least one user in the forum has a problem with traffic
>> control, this could help debug that in the future...
>
> Above needs to be in the commit message and actually linking to the relevant
> forum thread.
>
> in general sure, but I dislike the direction of the approach, as its again
> moving in the same direction as e.g., pmxcfs, a single boolean flag for all
> or nothing, which in practice will soon mean that's rather useless as its
> spamming so much stuff that relevant things get drowned even for experienced
> users.
>
> More fine grained approach it both, the verbosity and the topic axis would
> be much nicer, especially the latter as then a user could only enable
> traffic-control related logs.
>
> But just mentioning as this is a major pain point in pmxcfs that I get "hurt"
> by frequently..
makes total sense. did you already imagine any way to enable this?
could we simply have some 'sections' (like tc,connections,etc.)
and enable them like this:
PROXMOX_DEBUG=tc=debug,conn=info,foo=none
or should we avoid the environment variable at all, and put it in
the node config?
>
>> src/cached_traffic_control.rs | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/cached_traffic_control.rs b/src/cached_traffic_control.rs
>> index 2f077d36..cd13bc1b 100644
>> --- a/src/cached_traffic_control.rs
>> +++ b/src/cached_traffic_control.rs
>> @@ -342,6 +342,7 @@ impl TrafficControlCache {
>> Some((rule, _)) => {
>> match self.limiter_map.get(&rule.config.name) {
>> Some((read_limiter, write_limiter)) => {
>> + log::debug!("found traffic control rule for {:?} : {}", peer_ip, &rule.config.name);
>> (&rule.config.name, read_limiter.clone(), write_limiter.clone())
>> }
>> None => ("", None, None), // should never happen
>