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 9F7E762021 for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 10:15:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 97F4FC449 for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 10:15:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (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 firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id EC1D1C440 for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 10:15:22 +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 B325844C83 for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 10:15:22 +0100 (CET) From: Fabian Ebner To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 10:15:17 +0100 Message-Id: <20201204091518.15237-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.20.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.009 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust 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, vzdump.pm] Subject: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager 1/2] vzdump: warn when both storage and dumpdir are defined in vzdump.conf 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: Fri, 04 Dec 2020 09:15:23 -0000 and prefer storage, because the storage configuration might contain more settings. Warning is preferable over dying, because all backups would be affected (even if they don't use the vzdump.conf parameters) and the settings could've been compatible (i.e. dumpdir being the storage's dump dir). Previously one of the two options would randomly be chosen in the loop in new(), because of perl hash iteration. Reported here: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/vzdump-times-out-very-often-on-zfs-storage-pool.80035/post-354277 Signed-off-by: Fabian Ebner --- PVE/VZDump.pm | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git a/PVE/VZDump.pm b/PVE/VZDump.pm index 6892918f..2e44908a 100644 --- a/PVE/VZDump.pm +++ b/PVE/VZDump.pm @@ -230,6 +230,11 @@ sub read_vzdump_defaults { $res->{$key} = $defaults->{$key} if !defined($res->{$key}); } + if (defined($res->{storage}) && defined($res->{dumpdir})) { + debugmsg('warn', "both 'storage' and 'dumpdir' defined in '$fn' - ignoring 'dumpdir'"); + delete $res->{dumpdir}; + } + $parse_prune_backups_maxfiles->($res, "options in '$fn'"); return $res; -- 2.20.1