From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@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 4D48768869
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 09:45:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3AB8EE4FD
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 09:44:54 +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 id CEF74E4EF
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 09:44:53 +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 9CD92425AD
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 09:44:53 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <c323cfa1-52cf-7871-10c7-309fb366d72b@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 09:44:26 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
References: <20210722073319.55913-1-w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210722073319.55913-1-w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.410 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
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: [pbs-devel] applied: [PATCH proxmox] fs: link fallback for atomic
 create
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: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 07:45:24 -0000

On 22.07.21 09:33, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote:
> Some file systems don't support renameat2's RENAME_NOREPLACE
> flag (eg. ZFS), at the some time, some other file systems
> don't support hardlinks via link (eg. vfat, cifs), so we now
> try both: first the rename (since it's more efficient), then
> link+unlink for the rest.
> 
> If both fail, the file system is simply not supported for
> our purposes anyway...
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
> ---
>  proxmox/src/tools/fs.rs | 14 +++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
>

applied, thanks!