From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@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 AF5CD7399C
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:19:30 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AC727A4FF
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:19:30 +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 id 0E231A4F1
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:19:30 +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 D6AB344214
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:19:29 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <42c9200c-1882-6ef9-b729-ba0b228d9666@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:19:22 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:90.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/90.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
References: <20210607103158.21038-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210607103158.21038-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.791 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 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
 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
 information. [ceph.com]
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH manager] ui: ceph/Pools: defuse
 min_size warning
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: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 15:19:30 -0000

On 07.06.21 12:31, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> we should not warn for the ceph built-in default warnings for min_size
> having the min_size half of the size (rounded up) is ok and
> even the default for ceph
> 
> since there seems to be no 'quorum based' pg inconsistency recovery[0],
> only a copy from the authoritative osd, there is nothing wrong
> with setting that.
> 
> 0: https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/rados/operations/pg-repair/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
> ---
>  www/manager6/ceph/Pool.js | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
>

applied, with slightly reworded commit message, thanks!