From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <c.ebner@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) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65188BA73B
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 11:29:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 479EDE26A
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 11:28:40 +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))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 11:28:39 +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 72DF546B78
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 11:28:39 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <9dee9fce-5529-46b6-8bbc-d8565c574120@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 11:28:38 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US, de-DE
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
References: <20240305092703.126906-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <20240305092703.126906-34-c.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <1710246197.nrcmjqhopa.astroid@yuna.none>
From: Christian Ebner <c.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1710246197.nrcmjqhopa.astroid@yuna.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.037 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] [RFC v2 proxmox-backup 33/36] client: pxar: add
 look-ahead caching
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, 20 Mar 2024 10:29:10 -0000

On 3/12/24 15:08, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> this is only called if we have a previous payload
> 
>> +        &mut self,
>> +        encoder: &mut Encoder<'_, T>,
>> +        accessor: &mut Option<Directory<LocalDynamicReadAt<RemoteChunkReader>>>,
> so this must always be set for the call to make any sense, so we can
> drop the Option<>.

That will not work, as this recursively also calls the 
`add_entry_to_archive` in case when to flush entries which requires the 
optional previous metadata accessor as it calls the `add_directory`, 
which requires this to make sure the accessor is following along the 
path the archiver walks.

I will however see if refactoring according to your other suggestions 
improves this.