From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
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 DC28B969E0
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:10:31 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BF6F319140
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:10:01 +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))
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:10:01 +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 C8BE7450C1
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:10:00 +0200 (CEST)
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:09:51 +0200
Message-Id: <20240416120957.75269-2-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.2
In-Reply-To: <20240416120957.75269-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
References: <20240416120957.75269-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL -0.070 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy
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
Subject: [pve-devel] [PATCH v4 manager 1/5] vzdump: actually honor schema
defaults for performance
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 12:10:31 -0000
The 'performance' option itself defines no 'default' in the schema, so
what happened is that the defaults used by the backends (i.e. QEMU and
proxmox-backup-client) would be used. Luckily, they correspond to the
default values defined in the schema, i.e. in the 'backup-performance'
format. Make the code future-proof and use the actual defaults defined
in the schema instead of relying on that correspondence.
Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
---
No changes in v4.
PVE/VZDump.pm | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/PVE/VZDump.pm b/PVE/VZDump.pm
index 152eb3e5..b084fb5d 100644
--- a/PVE/VZDump.pm
+++ b/PVE/VZDump.pm
@@ -277,8 +277,14 @@ sub read_vzdump_defaults {
defined($default) ? ($_ => $default) : ()
} keys %$confdesc_for_defaults
};
+ my $performance_fmt = PVE::JSONSchema::get_format('backup-performance');
+ $defaults->{performance} = {
+ map {
+ my $default = $performance_fmt->{$_}->{default};
+ defined($default) ? ($_ => $default) : ()
+ } keys $performance_fmt->%*
+ };
$parse_prune_backups_maxfiles->($defaults, "defaults in VZDump schema");
- parse_performance($defaults);
my $raw;
eval { $raw = PVE::Tools::file_get_contents($fn); };
--
2.39.2