From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dietmar@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 6411B697E9
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  7 Aug 2020 07:41:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4D016220E1
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  7 Aug 2020 07:40:35 +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 3D436220D2
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  7 Aug 2020 07:40:34 +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 0192A437D9
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  7 Aug 2020 07:40:34 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 07:40:23 +0200 (CEST)
From: Dietmar Maurer <dietmar@proxmox.com>
To: Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <1013355773.442.1596778823805@webmail.proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <356ae075-5769-887b-4356-6906589a8901@proxmox.com>
References: <20200804104205.29540-1-s.reiter@proxmox.com>
 <20200804104205.29540-3-s.reiter@proxmox.com>
 <1066958979.400.1596689116942@webmail.proxmox.com>
 <356ae075-5769-887b-4356-6906589a8901@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.3-Rev19
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.095 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
Subject: [pbs-devel] applied: [PATCH proxmox-backup 2/7] backup: only allow
 finished backups as base snapshot
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, 07 Aug 2020 05:41:05 -0000

OK, applied.

> On 08/06/2020 9:58 AM Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com> wrote:
> 
>  
> On 8/6/20 6:45 AM, Dietmar Maurer wrote:
> > This break the assumption that the current backup only reference junks from
> > the previous one.
> > 
> 
> Why do we need that assumption?
> 
> > Instead, we can simply fail if the previous backup is not complete yet?
> > 
> 
> "Not complete *yet*" can't happen, since only one backup can run at a 
> time. So if this case occurs, it's because the server has broken backups.