From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9710BB862E for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 10:50:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7DF6CABAD for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 10:50:53 +0100 (CET) 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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 10:50:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 355EA47F5F for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 10:50:52 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <76ec99d7-3606-4803-b1fa-dd0adc46c3ec@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 10:50:51 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Hannes Duerr References: <20240306140834.223729-1-h.duerr@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Friedrich Weber In-Reply-To: <20240306140834.223729-1-h.duerr@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.078 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 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [qemu.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server v2 1/1] fix 1734: clone VM: if deactivation fails demote error to warning X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2024 09:50:53 -0000 Tested-by: Friedrich Weber Can confirm the patch fixes the issue of parallel qmclones failing occasionally due to a LVM deactivation error, and the extra \n in the task log from v1 is gone. One tiny comment inline: On 06/03/2024 15:08, Hannes Duerr wrote: > When a template with disks on LVM is cloned to another node, the volumes > are first activated, then cloned and deactivated again after cloning. > > However, if clones of this template are now created in parallel to other > nodes, it can happen that one of the tasks can no longer deactivate the > logical volume because it is still in use. The reason for this is that > we use a shared lock. > Since the failed deactivation does not necessarily have consequences, we > downgrade the error to a warning, which means that the clone tasks will > continue to be completed successfully. > > Signed-off-by: Hannes Duerr > --- > changes since v1: > - fix nits and spelling > > PVE/API2/Qemu.pm | 7 ++++++- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > index 69c5896..1ff5abe 100644 > --- a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > +++ b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ use PVE::DataCenterConfig; > use PVE::SSHInfo; > use PVE::Replication; > use PVE::StorageTunnel; > +use PVE::RESTEnvironment qw(log_warn); > > BEGIN { > if (!$ENV{PVE_GENERATING_DOCS}) { > @@ -3820,7 +3821,11 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ > > if ($target) { > # always deactivate volumes - avoid lvm LVs to be active on several nodes > - PVE::Storage::deactivate_volumes($storecfg, $vollist, $snapname) if !$running; > + eval { > + PVE::Storage::deactivate_volumes($storecfg, $vollist, $snapname) if !$running; > + }; > + log_warn($@) if ($@); I suppose the parentheses in the post-if condition `if ($@)` are not strictly necessary, but since ` ... if ($@);` does appear a couple of times in our existing code, so probably not a problem. > + > PVE::Storage::deactivate_volumes($storecfg, $newvollist); > > my $newconffile = PVE::QemuConfig->config_file($newid, $target);