From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 222851FF187 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2025 18:46:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AA59DDB7D; Mon, 20 Oct 2025 18:46:20 +0200 (CEST) From: Daniel Kral To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 18:45:33 +0200 Message-ID: <20251020164540.517231-8-d.kral@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20251020164540.517231-1-d.kral@proxmox.com> References: <20251020164540.517231-1-d.kral@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1760978738766 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.013 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 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. 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 ha-manager v2 3/8] manager: remove redundant add_service_usage_to_node from next_state_started 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: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" Since 5c2eef4b ("account service to source and target during move") a moving HA resource's load is accounted for on the source and target nodes. A HA resource in the 'started' state, which is not configured otherwise or has no pending CRM commands left to process, actively checks whether there is "better" node placement by querying select_service_node(...). When a better node is found, the HA resource will be migrated or relocated to the found node depending on their type. The add_service_usage_to_node(...) is redundant at this point as the subsequent call to change_service_state(...) to either the 'migrate' or 'relocate' state will call recompute_online_node_usage(...) and make the changes to $online_node_usage be discarded immediately. This calculation will remain true as recompute_online_node_usage(...) in change_service_state(...) is replaced with a more granular change to $online_node_usage in a later patch. Signed-off-by: Daniel Kral Reviewed-by: Fiona Ebner --- changes since v1: - added info that calculation will hold with later patches - added R-b src/PVE/HA/Manager.pm | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/PVE/HA/Manager.pm b/src/PVE/HA/Manager.pm index 7e43cfdf..e1b510be 100644 --- a/src/PVE/HA/Manager.pm +++ b/src/PVE/HA/Manager.pm @@ -1202,9 +1202,6 @@ sub next_state_started { ); if ($node && ($sd->{node} ne $node)) { - $self->{online_node_usage}->add_service_usage_to_node($node, $sid, $sd->{node}); - $self->{online_node_usage}->add_service_node($sid, $node); - if (defined(my $fallback = $sd->{maintenance_node})) { if ($node eq $fallback) { $haenv->log( -- 2.47.3 _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel