From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CB081FF168
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 14:17:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C46A3C5ED;
	Tue, 18 Feb 2025 14:17:41 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <e5da79da-88c3-454c-ba36-f9e89ba40138@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 14:17:07 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
From: Christian Ebner <c.ebner@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
References: <20250217131208.265219-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <20250217131208.265219-3-c.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <1739806100.hejephfmgd.astroid@yuna.none>
 <585ffd32-8868-44e5-91ee-df1eb2b2c87e@proxmox.com>
 <0e1975cc-d111-4556-bb26-340604939a55@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US, de-DE
In-Reply-To: <0e1975cc-d111-4556-bb26-340604939a55@proxmox.com>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.031 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
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 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 2/2] fix #5982: garbage
 collection: check atime updates are honored
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>
Reply-To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pbs-devel" <pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>

On 2/18/25 13:39, Christian Ebner wrote:

> Anyways, creating the all-zero chunk and use that for the check sounds 
> like a good optimization to me, as that allows to avoid conditional 
> checking in the phase 1 of garbage collection. However, at the cost of 
> having to make sure that it is never cleaned up by phase 2...

Well, which it obviously will not, since it was touched at the start of 
garbage collection. So no extra check needed for that :)


_______________________________________________
pbs-devel mailing list
pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel