From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD8451FF15C
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Wed, 26 Mar 2025 13:25:49 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1E465368C0;
	Wed, 26 Mar 2025 13:25:43 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <4c317f4d-42f4-4d0e-a276-517b2ed09dfc@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 13:25:08 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta
To: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20250325151421.3182493-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
 <8c06736a-abaf-42d5-9c56-cca185d30aee@proxmox.com>
 <8af44d26-f1ea-4272-b94a-d6540d02249f@proxmox.com>
 <b94f52e3-c579-456a-9ed9-684ddb03fde0@proxmox.com>
 <32f5c310-061a-4f6d-b856-6b3690442885@proxmox.com>
 <c4f6dfeb-6162-4409-a4a5-2d1b741c014e@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <c4f6dfeb-6162-4409-a4a5-2d1b741c014e@proxmox.com>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.021 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: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH storage/manager v3] allow upload & import of
 qcow2 in the web UI
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>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>

On 3/26/25 13:05, Fiona Ebner wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 26.03.25 um 12:47 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
>> On 3/26/25 12:41, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>>> Am 26.03.25 um 11:47 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
>>>> On 3/26/25 11:37, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>>>>> Am 25.03.25 um 16:14 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
>>>>>> most of the building blocks are already there:
>>>>>> * we can have qcow2 files in an import storage
>>>>>> * we can import qcow2 files via the api from such a storage
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this series fills in the missing bits & pieces:
>>>>>> * allow uploading qcow2 files into an import storage via the webgui
>>>>>> * adding the possibility to select such a file when creating a vm/disk
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We could maybe also allow this for raw/vmdk if we want to, but IMHO
>>>>>> we can start out with qcow2 and add the others as necssary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (if wanted, I can of course also add the others in a next version
>>>>>> or as
>>>>>> a follow up)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, please! It would be nice to have all three at the same time. Or is
>>>>> there any specific reason why you limit it to qcow2? Otherwise, users
>>>>> will just ask why support for these is missing right away.
>>>>
>>>> No specific reason, it was just easier/quicker to implement one first.
>>>> When we also allow raw files,
>>>> should we also allow other extensions than '.raw'? not sure if there is
>>>> one that
>>>> is often used (since I think '.raw' is more a PVE thing)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Right, raw is actually a bit of a headache because of that :P
>>>
>>> We could either:
>>>
>>> 1) have a list of common extensions for raw: .raw/.img/etc
>>>
>>> 1b) also treat files without extension as raw?
>>>
>>> 2) have a list of known extensions that are not raw and treat everything
>>> else as raw, while logging an informational message
>>>
>>> I'd prefer 1), because we already require specific extensions for other
>>> uploads.
>>>
>>> And likely we want to rename after/during upload, so images that are raw
>>> for us always have a ".raw" extension? Otherwise, we need to be careful
>>> enough to enforce the very same rules when parsing the import volume
>>> name and thus mostly also have them set in stone for the future. The
>>> advantage of the latter would be for the use case where one wants to
>>> manually make accessible their already existing image folders without
>>> using the API.
>>>
>>
>> I'd also use a list (e.g. for now '.raw', '.img')
>>
>> renaming is a good idea, but how should we do that? e.g.
>>
>> foo.img -> foo.img.raw ?
>>
>> because if we'd do foo.img -> foo.raw i think it's more likely
>> to get a collision than when we keep the .img in the name
>>
>> what do you think?
> 
> Yes, IMHO, simply attaching .raw is better.
> 
>> Side note (can be done later; or not) do we want to support compressed
>> files?
>> (gz, xz, etc.?) just noticed that e.g. the home assistant disk image is a
>> qcow2.xz file
> 
> Yeah, I think it makes sense. We'll just need to adapt the "needs
> extraction" logic?

i actually thought more about uncompressing on download/upload, otherwise
we can't check the file until importing...

in any case, this could still be done as a follow up, I'd like to concentrate
on uncompressed images for now if that's ok with you?


_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel