From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9])
by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5B5D1FF183
for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Wed, 18 Jun 2025 10:32:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 36BE0D257;
Wed, 18 Jun 2025 10:32:52 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <bcb2e46a-d848-4e00-aa14-c374951c51b3@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2025 10:32:13 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
Maximiliano Sandoval <m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
References: <20250612082318.118153-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
<476107cf-2197-46ba-890c-a7c91aaf636f@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <476107cf-2197-46ba-890c-a7c91aaf636f@proxmox.com>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL -0.031 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
RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
information.
RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
information.
RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
information.
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 manager v2] fix #4166: restore: add resource
pool selector
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>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Am 17.06.25 um 17:45 schrieb Thomas Lamprecht:
> Am 12.06.25 um 10:23 schrieb Maximiliano Sandoval:
>> The pool selector is only visible when restoring from the
>> Datacenter->{node}->{storage}->Backups panel.
This does not explain why it's done like that.
> I mean fine for now, but IMO if the user has enough rights then restoring
> to another pool for when overwriting an existing VM might make sense to;
> but that can definitively be an independent change.
Yes, either it should be supported or at least there should be some
notice to the user like I wrote in the review of v1:
> In case of an in-place restore, the pool option does not have any
> effect, so the selector should be hidden. And pre-existing, but the
> backend should print a message/warning that the parameter is ignored.
_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel