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 [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D23C81FF17B for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2024 17:01:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D57B533579; Tue, 5 Nov 2024 17:01:11 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <663d67da-37f3-4c27-8f90-8fe96f6c75e8@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 17:01:07 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US To: Severen Redwood <severen.redwood@sitehost.co.nz>, pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <D5DVFH6OZLBN.2KLGTH53ZHGNJ@sitehost.co.nz> From: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <D5DVFH6OZLBN.2KLGTH53ZHGNJ@sitehost.co.nz> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.037 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH SERIES v3] Add ability to prevent suggesting previously used VM/CT IDs 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> Cc: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@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> gave this series another spin in my test cluster and so far it seems to work as described. I did a very quick test if we see some noticeable "lag" when destroying a guest by filling the `used_vmids.list` with IDs from 100..30000 and a stepsize of 2, so close to 15k lines. But I didn't notice that it would take longer. A few small style nits are addressed, in the specific patches. But nothing severe that would justify a v4 right away. Consider this series: Tested-By: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com> Reviewed-By: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com> On 2024-11-05 02:58, Severen Redwood wrote: > Hi everyone, > > This is a small update to my previous patch series [1, 2] > adding optional support for preventing PVE from suggesting > previously used VM/CT IDs. > > In particular, missing use statements have been added to the > patches for marking VM/CT IDs as used, as noticed by Aaron > [3]. Everything else remains the same as in v2. > > Also note when building this patch series that the pve-cluster > patches must be applied and built first to prevent the build > of pve-manager from failing. > > If anyone has any other feedback, please let me know. > > Thanks, > Severen > > [1]: https://lore.proxmox.com/pve-devel/mailman.177.1728018639.332.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com/ > [2]: https://lore.proxmox.com/pve-devel/mailman.624.1730255368.332.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com/T/#t > [3]: https://lore.proxmox.com/pve-devel/mailman.624.1730255368.332.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com/T/#m7313a65f5b26f29ff0a2b4005069a7306311ccf6 > _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel