From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 544BE1FF15F for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2024 11:59:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 549B8A5C5; Mon, 4 Nov 2024 11:59:17 +0100 (CET) From: Christian Ebner To: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 11:58:28 +0100 Message-Id: <20241104105830.85612-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.029 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 Subject: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 1/3] sync: fix premature return in snapshot skip filter logic X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pbs-devel" While checking which snapshots to sync, the filter logic incorrectly included the first snapshot newer that the last synced one unconditionally, bypassing the transfer last check for that one snapshot. Following snapshots are correctly handled again. E.g. of an incorrect sync by excerpt of a task log provided by a user in the community forum [0], with transfer last set to 1: ``` skipped: 2 snapshot(s) (2024-09-29T18:00:28Z .. 2024-10-20T18:00:29Z) - older than the newest local snapshot skipped: 5 snapshot(s) (2024-10-28T19:00:28Z .. 2024-11-01T19:00:32Z) - due to transfer-last sync snapshot vm/110/2024-10-27T19:00:25Z ... sync snapshot vm/110/2024-11-02T19:00:23Z ``` Not only the last, but the first newer than newest and last were incorrectly synced. By dropping the early return, leading to incorrect inclusion of the snapshot, the transfer last condition is now correctly checked as well. Link to the issue reported in the community forum: [0] https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/156873/ Signed-off-by: Christian Ebner --- src/server/pull.rs | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/server/pull.rs b/src/server/pull.rs index 3117f7d2c..cc1427196 100644 --- a/src/server/pull.rs +++ b/src/server/pull.rs @@ -534,7 +534,6 @@ async fn pull_group( } else if already_synced_skip_info.count > 0 { info!("{already_synced_skip_info}"); already_synced_skip_info.reset(); - return true; } if pos < cutoff && last_sync_time != dir.time { -- 2.39.5 _______________________________________________ pbs-devel mailing list pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel