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)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF61C9151 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 14:47:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id ABFB4326FC for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 14:47:13 +0200 (CEST) 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 ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 14:47:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id ECD0443BFB for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 14:47:12 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <8d54012c-c9a4-7d62-c7d0-9ea0fd91240e@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 14:47:12 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.14.0 To: Wolfgang Bumiller Cc: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20230822103603.130998-1-g.goller@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Gabriel Goller In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.840 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 NICE_REPLY_A -2.684 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] fix #4343: updated `view_task_result` to bail on task failure 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: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 12:47:43 -0000 On 8/24/23 10:57, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote: > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 12:36:03PM +0200, Gabriel Goller wrote: >> Now we make an additional request on `api2/json/.../tasks/{upid}/status` to >> get the `exitstatus` of the task. This allows us to `bail` and thus >> get a non-zero exit code in the cli. >> >> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Goller >> --- >> pbs-client/src/task_log.rs | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/pbs-client/src/task_log.rs b/pbs-client/src/task_log.rs >> index 0bbb928d..4fb31fea 100644 >> --- a/pbs-client/src/task_log.rs >> +++ b/pbs-client/src/task_log.rs >> @@ -64,10 +64,24 @@ pub async fn display_task_log( >> let path = format!("api2/json/nodes/localhost/tasks/{upid_encoded}/log"); >> let result = client.get(&path, Some(param)).await?; >> >> + let status_path = format!("api2/json/nodes/localhost/tasks/{upid_encoded}/status"); >> + let status_result = client.get(&status_path, None).await?; >> + > ^ shouldn't `active` become false before this can happen? > so can we not just do this once after the loop? > >> let active = result["active"].as_bool().unwrap(); >> let total = result["total"].as_u64().unwrap(); >> let data = result["data"].as_array().unwrap(); >> >> + if status_result["data"]["status"].as_str() == Some("stopped") >> + && status_result["data"]["exitstatus"].as_str() != Some("OK") >> + { >> + bail!( >> + "{}", >> + data.iter() >> + .map(|d| try_strip_date(d["t"].as_str().unwrap())) >> + .fold(String::new(), |a, b| a + " " + b) > ^ not a fan of `+` for string concatenation. > `format!()` has at least a chance to figure out the lengths first, > whereas with `+` you're technically doing multiple independent > operations. > Further, you're not adding the newlines in between like it happens from > the use of `print` in the loop down below ;-) > > Also this seems to just use "whatever rest we had not printed yet" as an > _error_ message. If we check the status after the loop, we could just use > a generic bail!("task failed") as the output was already there. > > Unless there's a reason to do it this way instead? But I don't think we > can really know how much of it even _is_ error text. We might be getting > up to 500 (`limit` is 500) lines of random text :-) No, you are right, I submitted a new patch. I just didn't want to print multiple error messages... but I guess that's alright. >> + ); >> + } >> + >> let lines = data.len(); >> >> for item in data { >> @@ -76,9 +90,8 @@ pub async fn display_task_log( >> if n != start { >> bail!("got wrong line number in response data ({n} != {start}"); >> } >> - if strip_date && t.len() > 27 && &t[25..27] == ": " { >> - let line = &t[27..]; >> - println!("{line}"); >> + if strip_date { >> + println!("{}", try_strip_date(t)); >> } else { >> println!("{t}"); >> } >> @@ -127,3 +140,11 @@ pub async fn view_task_result( >> >> Ok(()) >> } >> + >> +fn try_strip_date(log_msg: &str) -> &str { >> + if log_msg.len() > 27 && &log_msg[25..27] == ": " { >> + &log_msg[27..] >> + } else { >> + log_msg >> + } >> +} >> -- >> 2.39.2