From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 C7A44872F for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 08:05:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A78F31B00B for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 08:05:29 +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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 08:05:27 +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 EDD7443DBA for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 08:05:26 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <0e762675-696f-5cef-74b2-8d83955f2518@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 08:05:26 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:107.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/107.0 Content-Language: en-GB To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Fiona Ebner References: <20221110143800.98047-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20221110143800.98047-17-f.ebner@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20221110143800.98047-17-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: =?UTF-8?Q?0=0A=09?=AWL -0.032 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: =?UTF-8?Q?address=0A=09?=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 =?UTF-8?Q?Alignment=0A=09?=NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF =?UTF-8?Q?Record=0A=09?=SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF =?UTF-8?Q?record=0A=09?=URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [pve2.pm, env.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH ha-manager 07/11] env: add get_crs_settings() method X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 07:05:29 -0000 Am 10/11/2022 um 15:37 schrieb Fiona Ebner: > for reading the resource scheduler settings. > > Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner > --- > src/PVE/HA/Env.pm | 7 +++++++ > src/PVE/HA/Env/PVE2.pm | 12 ++++++++++++ > src/PVE/HA/Sim/Env.pm | 9 +++++++++ > 3 files changed, 28 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/PVE/HA/Env.pm b/src/PVE/HA/Env.pm > index 00e3e3c..c014ff7 100644 > --- a/src/PVE/HA/Env.pm > +++ b/src/PVE/HA/Env.pm > @@ -269,6 +269,13 @@ sub get_ha_settings { > return $self->{plug}->get_ha_settings(); > } > > +# return cluster wide resource scheduling settings > +sub get_crs_settings { > + my ($self) = @_; > + > + return $self->{plug}->get_crs_settings(); > +} > + we try to keep the Env footprint on the smaller side, if possible; I'd rather add this to get_ha_settings, either as tuple or from a gut feeling maybe better as hash To clarify on that we could rename it to get_datacenter_settings first, I'd still limit it to the relevant ones to avoid info "leakage" that some future patch misuses then so subtly that we don't notice. It'd then return: { ha => {} crs => {} } fwiw, moving in max_workers would be an option then too, but no need for that in this series. maybe throw then also a comment in that changes are only to be taken in between new LRM rounds or new Manager creation (due to no active one) for stability purpose.