Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup] fix #4301: correctly pass rate limit parameters to API

[Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 03:50:59PM +0200, Stefan Hanreich wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/20/22 15:44, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 02:59:46PM +0200, Stefan Hanreich wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 10/20/22 14:48, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 01:37:31PM +0200, Stefan Hanreich wrote:
> > > > > With the old code the rate limit parameters got passed in their own
> > > > > dictionary under the limit key, but the API expects the rate-limit
> > > > > settings as top-level keys. This commit correctly sets the rate-limit
> > > > > parameters so the API actually uses them.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >    src/bin/proxmox-backup-manager.rs | 14 ++++++++++++--
> > > > >    1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/src/bin/proxmox-backup-manager.rs b/src/bin/proxmox-backup-manager.rs
> > > > > index 58e7e33a..cdd1037d 100644
> > > > > --- a/src/bin/proxmox-backup-manager.rs
> > > > > +++ b/src/bin/proxmox-backup-manager.rs
> > > > > @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ use std::collections::HashMap;
> > > > >    use std::io::{self, Write};
> > > > >    use std::str::FromStr;
> > > > > -use anyhow::Error;
> > > > > +use anyhow::{Error, format_err};
> > > > >    use serde_json::{json, Value};
> > > > >    use proxmox_router::{cli::*, RpcEnvironment};
> > > > > @@ -297,7 +297,6 @@ async fn pull_datastore(
> > > > >            "store": store,
> > > > >            "remote": remote,
> > > > >            "remote-store": remote_store,
> > > > > -        "limit": limit,
> > > > >        });
> > > > >        if remote_ns.is_some() {
> > > > > @@ -320,6 +319,17 @@ async fn pull_datastore(
> > > > >            args["remove-vanished"] = Value::from(remove_vanished);
> > > > >        }
> > > > > +    let args_map = args
> > > > > +        .as_object_mut()
> > > > > +        .ok_or_else(|| format_err!("args is not an Object"))?;
> > > > 
> > > > ^ We create the `args` map only a few lines further up, so it would be
> > > > fine to just `.unwrap()` here. And it would be nicer to keep the access
> > > > short (iow move the `.as_object_mut()` down to where it's used for `.append()`)
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Can replace it with unwrap(), shouldn't be a problem.
> > > 
> > > The reason why I stored it in a variable was that with a subsequent patch I
> > > will also append another map to the args, but I could then just call
> > > .as_object_mut() twice, what do you think?
> > 
> > I suppose that's fine. If you already know such things while sending a
> > patch without the followups being part of the same series, you can note
> > such things after the `---` in the patch mail, that way it won't
> > needlessly end up in the commit message, but still be visible to the
> > reviewer.
> > 
> > Come to think of it, there are a lot of `args[key] = value;` assignments
> > which could probably benefit from already having the `&mut Map` instead
> > of the `Value` enum.
> > 
> > Maybe should change it like this
> > 
> >      -    let mut args = json!(...)
> >      +    let mut args_value = json(!...);
> >      +    let args = args_value.as_object_mut().unwrap();
> > 
> > right where it is created, this way the unwrap will stay even closer to
> > the creation, the remaining assignments already see the object type, and
> > you can call append, too.
> > Finally, the `Some(args)` would need to be changed to `Some(args_value)`
> > in the `post()` call.
> > 
> 
> I will keep that in mind for future patches, thanks for the info!
> 
> The problem is when assigning via args[key] = value on a Map, it actually
> panics if the key doesn't exist in the map [1], so I'm afraid this isn't a
> possibility unless I'm missing something.

Can be changed to use `.insert()` ;-)