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)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26EFE9D13C for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2023 13:51:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 07EDE29A86 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2023 13:51:50 +0200 (CEST) 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 ; Fri, 2 Jun 2023 13:51:48 +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 AC9F448478 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2023 13:51:48 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2023 13:51:48 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.11.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Aaron Lauterer References: <20230601135342.2903359-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> <20230601135342.2903359-8-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <20230601135342.2903359-8-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.002 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 NICE_REPLY_A -0.1 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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 - Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v3 docs 7/7] storage: add hint to avoid storage aliasing 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, 02 Jun 2023 11:51:50 -0000 Am 01.06.23 um 15:53 schrieb Aaron Lauterer: > Signed-off-by: Aaron Lauterer > --- > I am happy for suggestions on how to improve the phrasing if it is not > clear enough. > > pvesm.adoc | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/pvesm.adoc b/pvesm.adoc > index 6ade1a4..7e91c50 100644 > --- a/pvesm.adoc > +++ b/pvesm.adoc > @@ -174,6 +174,9 @@ zfspool: local-zfs > content images,rootdir > ---- > > +CAUTION: It is not advisable to have multiple storage configurations pointing > +to the exact same underlying storage. Such an _aliased_ storage configuration > +can lead to unexpected behavior. s/not advisable/problematic/ would sound a bit stronger IMHO Maybe give some rationale and mention that volume IDs are not unique anymore with such a configuration and that PVE expects that in certain places, maybe giving a quick example. And we could also mention that in case the content types is different, it can be fine, but still not recommended.