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 6095A70DB0 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2021 13:19:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 501291B36E for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2021 13:18:40 +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 id 917C91B364 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2021 13:18:39 +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 69C56445E4 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2021 13:18:39 +0200 (CEST) From: Fabian Ebner To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2021 13:18:35 +0200 Message-Id: <20210907111835.62854-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.30.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.381 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, vzdump.pm] Subject: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager] vzdump: include current backup when pruning dumpdir 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, 07 Sep 2021 11:19:10 -0000 Not doing so leads to an off-by-one error, and pruning in a dumpdir really should behave the same way as pruning in a storage. Reported in the community forum: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/problem-mit-prune-backups.95737/ Signed-off-by: Fabian Ebner --- PVE/VZDump.pm | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/PVE/VZDump.pm b/PVE/VZDump.pm index b671ab19..d00be8b2 100644 --- a/PVE/VZDump.pm +++ b/PVE/VZDump.pm @@ -991,7 +991,7 @@ sub exec_backup_task { debugmsg ('info', "prune older backups with retention: $keepstr", $logfd); my $pruned = 0; if (!defined($opts->{storage})) { - my $bklist = get_backup_file_list($opts->{dumpdir}, $bkname, $task->{target}); + my $bklist = get_backup_file_list($opts->{dumpdir}, $bkname); PVE::Storage::prune_mark_backup_group($bklist, $prune_options); foreach my $prune_entry (@{$bklist}) { -- 2.30.2