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 51B4272554 for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 22:21:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3297C9689 for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 22:21:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.smtpout.orange.fr (smtp04.smtpout.orange.fr [80.12.242.126]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 908969673 for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 22:21:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dovecot.localdomain ([90.118.15.232]) by mwinf5d07 with ME id 98M02500350Qfqq038M0Qh; Tue, 25 May 2021 22:21:01 +0200 X-ME-Helo: dovecot.localdomain X-ME-Auth: anVsaWVuLmJsYWlzNUBvcmFuZ2UuZnI= X-ME-Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 22:21:01 +0200 X-ME-IP: 90.118.15.232 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox VE development discussion From: wb Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 22:20:59 +0200 Importance: normal X-Priority: 3 In-Reply-To: References: <02c8e0ce3079939415c742edf16c0966@mwinf5d78.me-wanadoo.net> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 1 AWL -0.060 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address HTML_MESSAGE 0.001 HTML included in message KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY 1 Sending domain does not have any anti-forgery methods KAM_NUMSUBJECT 0.5 Subject ends in numbers excluding current years RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 -0.001 Average reputation (+2) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_NONE 0.001 SPF: sender does not publish an SPF Record Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: [pve-devel] =?utf-8?b?UkXCoDogIFJFwqA6IHB2ZS1kZXZlbCBEaWdlc3Qs?= =?utf-8?q?_Vol_132=2C_Issue_53?= 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: Tue, 25 May 2021 20:21:41 -0000 > running does not mean working... Ok, but starting from an installation, I doubt :). De=C2=A0: Thomas Lamprecht Envoy=C3=A9 le=C2=A0:mardi 25 mai 2021 08:11 =C3=80=C2=A0: Proxmox VE development discussion; wb Objet=C2=A0:Re: [pve-devel] RE=C2=A0: pve-devel Digest, Vol 132, Issue 53 On 24.05.21 23:45, wb wrote: > However, since I am starting on a new installation, I am surprised to get= this kind of answer. > =C2=AB=C2=A0Your cluster fs is not working (pmxcfs). See you run on a bro= ken installation.=C2=A0=C2=BB > Or=20 > =C2=AB=C2=A0You need a working PVE installation before doing any API call= s...=C2=A0=C2=BB >=20 > With the following command, I have the process up! >=20 > ps aux | grep pmxcfs >=20 running does not mean working... What's the output/status of: # systemctl status pve-cluster=20 # touch /etc/pve/foo # findmnt /etc/pve >=20 > I think I have enough knowledge about SAML and Perl to do it, however, th= e support of a dev would be ideal at least on the lock part. >=20 Nobody questioned that.. > I'm trying to implement a new api so that Proxmox authentication works wi= th SAMLv2. Yes, as you stated in the initial mail.. >=20 > I would have preferred to have more info on the following part=C2=A0: > # this is just a readonly copy, the relevant one is in status.c from pmxc= fs > # observed files are the one we can get directly through IPCC, they are c= ached > # using a computed version and only those can be used by the cfs_*_file m= ethods >=20 I'd suggest ignoring the pmxcfs internal optimized cache-using part, you do= not need that for a start, just use the common file_get_content / file_set_content h= elper from the PVE::Tools module, you could do everything with those for now and only = then migrate to a optimized cfs_*_{read,write} helper. > To try to bring a little more element, I added a file to the following li= st in the PVE::Cluster file > my=C2=A0$observed=C2=A0=3D=C2=A0{ > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0'request.tmp'=C2=A0=3D>=C2=A01, >=20 > Still in the PVE::Cluster file, It is well in the following part that it = blocks=C2=A0: >=20 >=20 > If I take the error message from the first email, > =C2=AB=C2=A0 error during cfs-locked \'file-request_tmp\' operation: pve = cluster filesystem not online /etc/pve/priv/lock.=C2=A0=C2=BB > If I test the dir /etc/pve/priv/lock, it exists! Existence is not a problem, pmxcfs is a clustered realtime configuration fi= lesystem, it either may not be mounted (and again, running is not always a 100% guara= ntee that it is still mounted) or in a cluster (or thinking that's in a cluster due t= o `/etc/corosync/corosync.conf` and/or `/etc/pve/corosync.conf` existing) but= has no quorum, i.e., read-only >=20 > Do the files we add in PVE::Cluster file need to be listed in /var/lib/pv= e-cluster/config.db, if so, any spec please? no, that's the backing DB, I'd heavily recommend not modifying that one dir= ectly if unsure. Those files get always created on the FUSE VFS layer (besides the v= ery barebone initial one we create with a small helper). Note: you need the correct permissions in your service, it must be in www-d= ata group to be able to read/test directory existance and run as root for writing.