From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
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 379857088B
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 12:52:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 35A9818050
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 12:52:41 +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) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id C610818045
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 12:52:40 +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 9BADA43C2A
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 12:52:40 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <9c476d3a-e170-5cc2-825d-7ac32bcf2ffc@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 12:52:39 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <20220615082040.96959-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com>
From: Matthias Heiserer <m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220615082040.96959-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.190 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           -0.001 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
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/4] fix #3786: add a "deep sync" option
 to sync jobs
X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 10:52:41 -0000

On 15.06.2022 10:20, Stefan Sterz wrote:
> this series adds a "deep sync" option to sync jobs. a deep sync uses
> the information from a previous verification job to re-sync snapshots
> that have corrupted chunks.
> 
> the deep sync option is added to the "advanced" section of the sync
> job configuration intentionally for the reasoning see commit 3.
> however, i am not entirely sure if that's the best way of handling
> this.
> 
Tested on a PBS VM with two data stores, works great!
I quite like it.