From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFBEC92D57 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2023 12:41:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D1C551C0D1 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2023 12:40:33 +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 ; Wed, 15 Feb 2023 12:40:32 +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 6B0D447329 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2023 12:40:32 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <432ebac6-b8da-8a95-77a9-bd505c9e2742@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 12:40:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:110.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/110.0 Content-Language: de-AT, en-GB To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion , =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= References: <20230213154555.49610-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> <20230213154555.49610-2-h.laimer@proxmox.com> <1676378795.mvvh7qehki.astroid@yuna.none> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <1676378795.mvvh7qehki.astroid@yuna.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.124 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.35 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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 1/4] api2: make remote for sync-jobs optional 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 11:41:04 -0000 Am 14/02/2023 um 15:33 schrieb Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler: > On February 13, 2023 4:45 pm, Hannes Laimer wrote: >> ... and update places where it is used. >> A SyncJob not having a remote means it is pulling >> from a local datastore. > high level: I wonder whether we really need this for sync jobs, or whet= her just > having it for pull (or as a new API/CLI endpoint copy/move?) would be e= nough as > a start? is there a use case for scheduled local syncing? > =20 Yes, e.g. existing ones could be: having a small and fast "incoming" data= store, which avoids blocking guests on backups and has the "hot" set of snapshot= s (most recent) available while using a slower, but huge second one for long term= archival. Future ones would be sync to a S3 backed object storage, which we probabl= y only want to have done from existing data (similar to tape), but still avoid t= he media catalogue and labelling overhead tape must have to be really useful. Another future one is removable datastores, which this is upfront work fo= r. While we might not always have time trigged event there, its still useful to ha= ve use a sync job for, e.g., hot-plug triggered events. Besides that, I'm a bit reserved against adding a move that can cross dat= astore boundaries, as doing that manually seems not that useful for any but the = smallest PBS instances (especially on the snapshot level) and for others a sync + = prune is normally better anyway. Moving groups and namespaces around in the sam= e datastore OTOH would be useful for organizing purpose, and without crossing into an= other CAS also simple to implement.