From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D28BD1FF189 for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2025 16:37:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CEAFF32367; Thu, 4 Sep 2025 16:37:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Hannes Laimer To: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 16:37:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20250904143735.125857-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1756996640803 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.024 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] [RFC proxmox{, -backup} 0/6] add support for configuring max 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" This uses POSIX semaphores to control how many backups run at any given time. Semaphores seemed like a fitting choice given the problem, so I added a basic wrapper for named ones to proxmox-sys. Also, the changes needed to add concurrency limits in PBS were minimal. A few questions I still have and would be great to get some feedback on, - do we want to use semaphores like proposed here? Are there any good reasons not to? - should we include things like verify/gc/prune? Would an extra sem for reading make sense(so separate limits for r and w, idk if there's a use-case)? Nothing UI-wise is included, and for changes to apply the proxy has to be restarted. Not sure if restarting the proxy is "ok-ish" ux wise, I guess not :P But changing it involves re-creating the semaphore, which is fine, just that there won't exist one for a really short time... proxmox: Hannes Laimer (2): sys: add wrapper for POSIX semaphores pbs-api-types: add concurrency_limit to DataStoreConfig pbs-api-types/src/datastore.rs | 5 + proxmox-sys/Cargo.toml | 1 + proxmox-sys/src/lib.rs | 2 + proxmox-sys/src/semaphore.rs | 164 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 172 insertions(+) create mode 100644 proxmox-sys/src/semaphore.rs proxmox-backup: Hannes Laimer (4): api: config: update/delete concurrency_limit on datastore Cargo.toml: add 'semaphore' feature to proxmox-sys dep bin: proxy: initialize concurrency semaphores for datastores api: backup: wait for semaphore if one exists Cargo.toml | 2 +- src/api2/backup/mod.rs | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- src/api2/config/datastore.rs | 9 +++++++++ src/bin/proxmox-backup-proxy.rs | 11 +++++++++++ 4 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) Summary over all repositories: 8 files changed, 215 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) -- Generated by git-murpp 0.8.1 _______________________________________________ pbs-devel mailing list pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel