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 E3B1C9E836 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 10:30:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C3CC0137B8 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 10:30:40 +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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 10:30:39 +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 64C1844FEB for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 10:30:39 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <89a690b1-1497-4562-a615-6d6ca08693fb@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 10:30:38 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: de-AT, en-US To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion , Philipp Hufnagl References: <20231109144329.1830522-1-p.hufnagl@proxmox.com> <20231109144329.1830522-4-p.hufnagl@proxmox.com> From: Lukas Wagner In-Reply-To: <20231109144329.1830522-4-p.hufnagl@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.008 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 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup v2 3/3] docs: document new include/exclude paramenter 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: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 09:30:40 -0000 On 11/9/23 15:43, Philipp Hufnagl wrote: > Adding the newly introduced optional include/exclude parameter to the > PBS documentation. > > Signed-off-by: Philipp Hufnagl > --- > docs/managing-remotes.rst | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/docs/managing-remotes.rst b/docs/managing-remotes.rst > index 1c52e120..2f08c3b1 100644 > --- a/docs/managing-remotes.rst > +++ b/docs/managing-remotes.rst > @@ -116,6 +116,14 @@ of the specified criteria are synced. The available criteria are: > The same filter is applied to local groups, for handling of the > ``remove-vanished`` option. > > +A ``group-filter`` can be inverted by adding ``exclude:`` to its beginning. > + > +* Regular expression example, excluding the match: > + .. code-block:: console > + > + # proxmox-backup-manager sync-job update ID --group-filter exclude:regex:'^vm/1\d{2,3}$' > + > +If include as well as exclude filters are used, all include filters will be run before the exclude filters. Maybe it would make sense here to enumerate the different cases and their exact behaviors, e.g. in a table? - no filters: all backup groups - include: only those matching the include filters - exclude: all but those matching the exclude filters - both: those matching the include filters, but without those matching the exclude filters Also, I'm not sure if 'will be run before' is easy to understand for users. I think something alike how I described the 'both' case should be easier to understand -- - Lukas