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)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C9CB8A3A9 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 11:08:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2298936600 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 11:08:37 +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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 11:08:35 +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 4E90042DAA for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 11:08:35 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2022 11:08:27 +0200 From: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?q?Gr=FCnbichler?= To: Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20220613102959.36556-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: astroid/0.15.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid) Message-Id: <1659431219.7qhji1l67l.astroid@nora.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.159 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com] Subject: [pve-devel] applied-series: [PATCH-SERIES v2 manager/guest-common] replication: improve removal of stale snapshots/volumes 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: Tue, 02 Aug 2022 09:08:37 -0000 including RFC patch, which looked sensible to me ;) thanks! On July 27, 2022 1:22 pm, Fiona Ebner wrote: > Am 13.06.22 um 12:29 schrieb Fabian Ebner: >> In certain scenarios, see manager 2/2 and guest-common 3/4, replicated >> volumes could end up orphaned. This series attempts to fix those, as >> well as making removal of stale replication snaphsots a bit more >> robust. Also includes some slight documentation improvements regarding >> prepare(). >>=20 >=20 > Ping >=20 >> v1 can be found here (but there was no discussion): >> https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/2020-October/045388.html >>=20 >> Changes from v1: >> * Adapt to changed behavior of prepare(), so we still only catch >> volumes that had replication snapshots belonging to the job. >> * Drop simplification that would only rely on replication state >> to get storages for full removal. >> * Add safe-guard to only remove other replication snaphsots if the >> last_sync snapshot is present. >>=20 >>=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > pve-devel mailing list > pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel >=20 >=20 >=20