From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FBE91FF15F for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2024 14:01:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A3B0AC68F; Mon, 16 Dec 2024 14:02:01 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=tuxis.nl; s=mail; h=from:reply-to:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: in-reply-to:references; bh=bOGirJvtkYm57XKabdJbVSNHWt9NeYN9hzQyJA3y/rs=; b=PuHdGfllcdrBzTbTRe346zW0K2QsXOSfHEWtIhj8lPLmj/5lIJm57ulCyMScjDs+PLai9vJD1V2IU Q5PkuEsSD3vMhdjZSOB/xjB8XMiWP5Sts7Oia1EselBj2ikxrLpL0jyrwL1cJyM1LAOgQWx0P2lmDf VnVdqsmj63XuVNv7si/9GyLipp8Ao/uQX41c6SwJ+FT3boEr51ssOLd3Yd+JZiOyCWmDyETxisMnfj FaD6n+4m4yo8yEdbm2johiTgiOQPiozS3liJ7yZDNh/QcNv4Pq1nlpSvyoUjrhDyTypNlbSCdB0NQT IN41aHeRpS90eyh2kobgnowascEew4g== X-Footer: dHV4aXMubmw= From: "Mark Schouten" To: "Shannon Sterz" Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2024 13:01:21 +0000 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: eM_Client/10.1.4828.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.016 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain DMARC_PASS -0.1 DMARC pass policy HTML_MESSAGE 0.001 HTML included in message 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] Authentication performance X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Mark Schouten , Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Cc: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3589692068443614667==" Errors-To: pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pbs-devel" --===============3589692068443614667== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------=_MB5BED59C5-E0E4-46A1-A1DF-8458DCBCFE54" --------=_MB5BED59C5-E0E4-46A1-A1DF-8458DCBCFE54 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, >Sure, just be aware that you have to manually delete the key before >restarting the PBS. Upgrading alone won't affect the key. Ideally you'd >test this before rolling it out, if you can Yes, we will keep that in mind. > >Possible, yes, that would depend on your configuration. Are all of these >datastores defined with a backing device? Because if not, than this >should be fairly fast (as in, this should not actually touch the disks). >If they are, then yes this could be slow as each store would trigger at >least 2 stat calls afaict. They are all ZFS based, so not sure if that helps. >In any case, it should be fine to move the `mount_status` check after >the `if allowed || allow_id` check from what i can tell. Not sure why >we'd need to check the mount_status for a datastore we won't include in >the resulsts anyway. Same goes for parsing the store config imo. Send a >patch for that [1]. > >[1]: https://lore.proxmox.com/pbs-devel/20241216115044.208595-1-s.sterz@pr= oxmox.com/T/#u This might help, at least. Thanks! So looking further into this, I noticed an average of ~ 70 calls per=20 second on: /api2/json/admin/datastore/.+/status I think that is `pub async fn status()` in that same file, right?=20 Nothing much to tune there. Thanks again, I will keep you posted on the progress after our=20 maintenance window. =E2=80=94 Mark Schouten CTO, Tuxis B.V. +31 318 200208 / mark@tuxis.nl --------=_MB5BED59C5-E0E4-46A1-A1DF-8458DCBCFE54 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

Sure, just be aware that you have to manually del= ete the key before
restarting the PBS. Upgrading alone won't affect= the key. Ideally you'd
test this before rolling it out, if you can
=

Yes, we will keep that in mind.
=C2=A0=
Possible, yes, that would depend on your configur= ation. Are all of these
datastores defined with a backing device? Because = if not, than this
should be fairly fast (as in, this should not act= ually touch the disks).
If they are, then yes this could be slow as each= store would trigger at
least 2 stat calls afaict.
They are all ZFS based= , so not sure if that helps.

In any case, it should be fine to move the `mount= _status` check after
the `if allowed || allow_id` check from what i ca= n tell. Not sure why
we'd need to check the mount_status for a datasto= re we won't include in
the resulsts anyway. Same goes for parsing the st= ore config imo. Send a
patch for that [1].
=C2=A0
[1]: https://lore.proxmox.com/pbs-devel/20241216115044.208595-1-s.sterz@proxmox= .com/T/#u

This might help, at least.=C2=A0Tha= nks!

<= /div>
So looking further= into this, I noticed an average of ~ 70 calls per second on:
/api2/json/admin/datastore= /.+/status=C2=A0
<= span>
I thin= k that is `pub async fn status()` in that same file, right? Nothing much to = tune there.

=
Thanks again, I will keep you= posted on the progress after our maintenance window.

=E2=80=94=C2=A0
Mark Schouten
CTO, Tuxis B.V.
+31 318 200208 /=C2=A0mark@tu= xis.nl

--------=_MB5BED59C5-E0E4-46A1-A1DF-8458DCBCFE54-- --===============3589692068443614667== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ pbs-devel mailing list pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel --===============3589692068443614667==--