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 170EA96BA9
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:11:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id EAE7A19FA7
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:11:20 +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 14:11:20 +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 1BE5045029
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:11:20 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <364a9ffc-526d-463c-8f88-7af276474cc0@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:11:19 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20231107134928.81303-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
<97871f55-1a09-42c7-a17e-42732223ecde@proxmox.com>
<24e81908-5ae1-48c7-81a2-7fcb1a085be7@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <24e81908-5ae1-48c7-81a2-7fcb1a085be7@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH-SERIES v3 manager/docs] close #4513: add
performance tab for backup jobs
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 12:11:51 -0000
Am 16.04.24 um 12:16 schrieb Thomas Lamprecht:
> Am 25/03/2024 um 15:09 schrieb Fiona Ebner:
>> Am 07.11.23 um 14:49 schrieb Fiona Ebner:
>>> Improve fallback for the 'performance' sub-properties by using a
>>> per-property fallback and honor schema defaults.
>>>
>>> Expose commonly used performance-related properties in the backup job
>>> UI under a new tab.
>>>
>>
>> Ping. Still applies. I need to tell forum users how to do this via CLI
>> rather frequently, so would be nice to have in the UI too.
>>
>
> I do not like using "Performance" here, that conveys that this includes
> important options that one must set to improve performance, and it's
> settings won't help with overall performance (buy a "faster" HW for that).
>
> In short, while the name is not wrong in a technical sense, all knobs will
> change performance on some axis, that's not really matching with user
> expectations IMO.
>
> Even just calling this "Options" would be better IMO, even better might
> be to call it "Advanced" and move also the single advanced option we
> currently have ("Repeat missed" in General tab) over there.
>
> That way newer users are made aware off that these options are
> definitively not a must to adapt to get good performance, but rather for
> some advanced options for tuning/limiting/etc. ...
Sounds good to me. Sent a v4 incorporating these suggestions:
https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/2024-April/063004.html