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 561A01FF13E for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:54:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 98D43E435; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:54:57 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <299b3a77-f1a3-4081-bb49-a99c83c7a11e@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:54:24 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion , Arthur Bied-Charreton References: <20260121104537.495434-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US, de-DE From: Christian Ebner In-Reply-To: X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1769176406143 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.048 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 Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox{, -backup} v2 0/2] GC: log progress output for phase 2 S3 datastores 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pbs-devel" Hi Arthur, On 1/23/26 2:39 PM, Arthur Bied-Charreton wrote: > > Tested-by: Arthur Bied-Charreton > > I tested these changes on a local MinIO S3 datastore, the rate-limited > logging output appears at the expected intervals, and the request statistics > are accurately displayed. Thanks for testing! > Just one question maybe: why is sequential consistency needed for the request > counters? Wouldn't relaxed ordering be sufficient for statistics? This was done with the intention to maybe use the same counters also for enforcing soft limits and/or enforce warnings when certain thresholds have been reached, where stricter ordering might be needed. _______________________________________________ pbs-devel mailing list pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel