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 9659365059
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:50:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8CF491AA80
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:50:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [212.186.127.180])
 (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 75C151AA71
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:50:06 +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 3E87A432F9
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:50:06 +0200 (CEST)
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
References: <20200721130618.14361-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <89b024e7-dd90-bf20-5c08-16e7f434a782@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:50:05 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:79.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/79.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200721130618.14361-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.009 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED        -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
 medium trust
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH manager] ui: add ceph recovery graph
 and progressbar
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, 21 Jul 2020 17:50:07 -0000

On 21.07.20 15:06, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> shows a runningChart (like for reads) for the recovery speed
> also shows a progressbar of the health percentage of the cluster
> with an estimate of how long the recovery might need
> (unhealthy objects) / (objects per second)
> 
> only show them when a recovery is ongoing or there are unhealthy
> objects
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
> ---
> we could also opt to only show it when there is really recovery
> going on (recovering_objects_per_sec !== undefined) but
> in my tests sometimes during recovery, ceph would not return those
> values intermittently, making the panel flicker, so i opted
> to show it also when there are unhealthy objects
> (though i am not opposed to to the first and have some counter
> to catch intermittent missing values)
> 
>  www/manager6/ceph/Status.js | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
>

applied, thanks!