Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 2/2] traffic-control: add debug log when we found a matching rule

[Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>]

On 04.02.22 10:12, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
> ---
> optional, at least one user in the forum has a problem with traffic
> control, this could help debug that in the future...

Above needs to be in the commit message and actually linking to the relevant
forum thread.

in general sure, but I dislike the direction of the approach, as its again
moving in the same direction as e.g., pmxcfs, a single boolean flag for all
or nothing, which in practice will soon mean that's rather useless as its
spamming so much stuff that relevant things get drowned even for experienced
users.

More fine grained approach it both, the verbosity and the topic axis would
be much nicer, especially the latter as then a user could only enable
traffic-control related logs.

But just mentioning as this is a major pain point in pmxcfs that I get "hurt"
by frequently..

>  src/cached_traffic_control.rs | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/src/cached_traffic_control.rs b/src/cached_traffic_control.rs
> index 2f077d36..cd13bc1b 100644
> --- a/src/cached_traffic_control.rs
> +++ b/src/cached_traffic_control.rs
> @@ -342,6 +342,7 @@ impl TrafficControlCache {
>              Some((rule, _)) => {
>                  match self.limiter_map.get(&rule.config.name) {
>                      Some((read_limiter, write_limiter)) => {
> +                        log::debug!("found traffic control rule for {:?} : {}", peer_ip, &rule.config.name);
>                          (&rule.config.name, read_limiter.clone(), write_limiter.clone())
>                      }
>                      None => ("", None, None), // should never happen