From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6A711FF09C for ; Mon, 05 Oct 2026 16:51:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A522621784; Mon, 05 Oct 2026 16:48:58 +0200 (CEST) From: =?UTF-8?q?Michael=20K=C3=B6ppl?= To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Subject: [PATCH manager v7 18/24] fix #4369: api: optionally only suggest unique IDs Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2026 16:47:59 +0200 Message-ID: <20261005144805.825538-19-m.koeppl@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20261005144805.825538-1-m.koeppl@proxmox.com> References: <20261005144805.825538-1-m.koeppl@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1791211690257 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.330 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) 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 Message-ID-Hash: LVM67HAHBMHJ6RAJSHZ7VPN5HAGYIHB3 X-Message-ID-Hash: LVM67HAHBMHJ6RAJSHZ7VPN5HAGYIHB3 X-MailFrom: m.koeppl@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: At the moment, the `/cluster/nextid` API endpoint will return the lowest available VM/CT ID, which means that it will suggest re-using VM IDs. This can be undesirable, so add an optional check to ensure that it chooses an ID which is not and has never been in use. This optional behaviour is enabled with unique=1 in the next-id datacenter option and the previously used IDs are tracked as a list in the file `/etc/pve/virtual-guest/used-guest-ids`. Originally-by: Daniel Krambrock Originally-by: Severen Redwood Signed-off-by: Michael Köppl --- PVE/API2/Cluster.pm | 10 ++++++++-- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/PVE/API2/Cluster.pm b/PVE/API2/Cluster.pm index 4e5efbfd9..e5017f6c4 100644 --- a/PVE/API2/Cluster.pm +++ b/PVE/API2/Cluster.pm @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ use PVE::DataCenterConfig; use PVE::Exception qw(raise_param_exc); use PVE::Firewall; use PVE::GuestHelpers; +use PVE::GuestID; use PVE::HA::Config; use PVE::HA::Env::PVE2; use PVE::INotify; @@ -1045,8 +1046,13 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ my $lower = $next_id->{lower} // 100; my $upper = $next_id->{upper} // (1000 * 1000); # note, lower than the schema-maximum - for (my $i = $lower; $i < $upper; $i++) { - return $i if !defined($idlist->{$i}); + if ($next_id->{unique}) { + my $id = PVE::GuestID::get_next_unused_id($lower); + return $id if $id < $upper; + } else { + for (my $i = $lower; $i < $upper; $i++) { + return $i if !defined($idlist->{$i}); + } } die "unable to get any free VMID in range [$lower, $upper]\n"; -- 2.47.3