From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02F9E1FF138 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2026 17:58:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8920E7768; Wed, 18 Mar 2026 17:58:30 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Lamprecht To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Daniel Kral Subject: Re: [RFC ha-manager 17/21] usage: add dynamic usage scheduler Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 17:54:55 +0100 Message-ID: <20260318165820.81517-5-t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20260217141437.584852-31-d.kral@proxmox.com> References: <20260217141437.584852-1-d.kral@proxmox.com> <20260217141437.584852-31-d.kral@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1773853063718 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.011 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 Message-ID-Hash: JK3BOQXOK445VT5JX3GT7YRP3FXWLYYZ X-Message-ID-Hash: JK3BOQXOK445VT5JX3GT7YRP3FXWLYYZ X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue, 17 Feb 2026, Daniel Kral wrote:=0D > --- a/src/PVE/HA/Usage/Dynamic.pm=0D > +++ b/src/PVE/HA/Usage/Dynamic.pm=0D > @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@=0D > [...]=0D > + ->log('err', "unable to score nodes according to dynamic usage f= or service '$sid' - $@");=0D =0D Missing `if $@` guard here, so this logs an error on every successful=0D call AFAICT?=0D =0D Seems to get fixed in patch 20/21, but that means patches 17-19 spam the=0D log on every service placement, while we do not plan to partially apply=0D this, it still should be fixed in this commit.=0D =0D btw. the error message also says "static" in get_service_usage, fixed to=0D "dynamic" also only in 20/21 -- same thing, should be correct from the=0D start.=0D =0D > --- a/src/PVE/HA/Manager.pm=0D > +++ b/src/PVE/HA/Manager.pm=0D > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ use PVE::HA::Rules::NodeAffinity qw(get_node_affinity);= =0D > [...]=0D > +use PVE::HA::Usage::Dynamic;=0D =0D This is unconditional, unlike the Static module which uses the guarded=0D `eval { require ... }` + `$have_static_scheduling` pattern. If the Rust=0D library is not installed, the entire HA Manager fails to load.=0D Should either follow the same guarded approach or we just make the rust=0D library unconditional, which is probably more than fine to do now.=0D