From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <c.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 0E07DB9638
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 09:24:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DB3A48AD6
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 09:23:30 +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
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 09:23:28 +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 B492F489DA
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 09:23:28 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <158f6059-3f93-4455-8c2b-71db2b848428@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 09:23:28 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US, de-DE
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
References: <20240305092703.126906-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <20240305092703.126906-25-c.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <1710232817.oiegytfp1w.astroid@yuna.none>
From: Christian Ebner <c.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1710232817.oiegytfp1w.astroid@yuna.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.038 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: Re: [pbs-devel] [RFC v2 proxmox-backup 24/36] index: fetch chunk
 form index by start/end-offset
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: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 08:24:01 -0000

On 3/12/24 09:50, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> s/form/from/
> 
> but the commit title seems a bit off anyway - this doesn't fetch any
> chunk
> 
> 
> and tbh, this also seems like a very generic name ;) there's also only a
> single call site, so maybe this could live as a helper there? or do we
> expect to need this somewhere else in the near future?
> 

Okay, I will move this to the archiver and use the public interface to 
operate on the index. Also, I will use the optimizations suggested by 
Dietmar to speed up the search.