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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75914942C1 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 10 Jan 2023 14:21:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5DA72AD9E for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 10 Jan 2023 14:21:56 +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)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 10 Jan 2023 14:21:55 +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 9AB9844D79 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 10 Jan 2023 14:21:55 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <887051ff-30e4-2fb7-f2f5-90d6770e05d5@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 14:21:54 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.5.0 Content-Language: en-US To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Christoph Heiss <c.heiss@proxmox.com> References: <20230102123633.2493599-1-c.heiss@proxmox.com> <20230102123633.2493599-3-c.heiss@proxmox.com> <dff207ed-4116-2010-1be0-d3b263469ea9@proxmox.com> <20230110111141.2hxrozsr7fatvswj@maui.proxmox.com> <cd42c9e1-f890-0b6a-b00b-5ef96f74a513@proxmox.com> <20230110124441.g6mapiv7yauo2xjc@maui.proxmox.com> <159837ba-f916-7b03-2cab-8e486b38b6bb@proxmox.com> From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <159837ba-f916-7b03-2cab-8e486b38b6bb@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.127 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 NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) POISEN_SPAM_PILL 0.1 Meta: its spam POISEN_SPAM_PILL_1 0.1 random spam to be learned in bayes POISEN_SPAM_PILL_3 0.1 random spam to be learned in bayes 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] fix #4289: pbs: wait for backup verification to finish before updating volume attribute 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, 10 Jan 2023 13:21:56 -0000 Am 10.01.23 um 14:06 schrieb Fiona Ebner: > Am 10.01.23 um 13:44 schrieb Christoph Heiss: >> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 01:34:14PM +0100, Fiona Ebner wrote: >>> One way to decide if the current behavior should be used as a fallback >>> would be to check the protected status after finishing the backup. That >>> is slightly racy though, because something else could've already changed >>> the protection between finishing and the check. >> I'd base it off the decision from above - if the `proxmox-backup-client` >> version supports setting it directly, use that, otherwise simply fall >> back. > It's not just the client, but the server that needs to support it too. > To make sure that the client/QEMU/etc. support it, we can just have > pve-manager depend on a recent enough version. For the server, there is > a /version API endpoint we can query. For QEMU, we don't want to force specific package versions, so using package dependency is not good there. Instead, we can use the 'query-proxmox-support' QMP command to see if it's supported. That also makes the check work for already running VMs.