From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0CD21FF0B0 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2026 09:32:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2CABC215C2; Tue, 10 Nov 2026 09:32:01 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2026 09:31:47 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta Subject: Re: [PATCH pve-manager] api: nodes: dns: restart postfix after changing name servers To: Jonas Theisen , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20261109105127.96814-1-j.theisen@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Dominik Csapak In-Reply-To: <20261109105127.96814-1-j.theisen@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1794299512591 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.315 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) 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 Message-ID-Hash: UDUWVCCYKKJAIXRIFFUIUJ4RNF2CGG2R X-Message-ID-Hash: UDUWVCCYKKJAIXRIFFUIUJ4RNF2CGG2R X-MailFrom: d.csapak@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Hi, first, does postfix really need a restart or would a 'reload' be enough? if so, would it be possible to use try-reload-or-restart instead? some comments inline: On 11/9/26 11:51 AM, Jonas Theisen wrote: > Postfix runs its SMTP client in a chroot and copies /etc/resolv.conf > into it only when the instance starts. A running postfix therefore > keeps using the old name servers after a DNS settings change, > which can make mail delivery fail until the next restart. > > Restart the postfix service after writing the new settings, but only > if it is currently active. > A failed restart only warns, since the DNS settings were already > written. > > Came up in: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/187442 > > Signed-off-by: Jonas Theisen > --- > PVE/API2/Nodes.pm | 11 +++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/PVE/API2/Nodes.pm b/PVE/API2/Nodes.pm > index df0b2c2d..35078d3b 100644 > --- a/PVE/API2/Nodes.pm > +++ b/PVE/API2/Nodes.pm > @@ -1671,6 +1671,17 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ > > PVE::INotify::update_file('resolvconf', $param); > > + # postfix copies resolv.conf into its chroot only on start, so a running instance needs a > + # restart to use the new name servers > + eval { > + my $active = PVE::Tools::run_command( please use `PVE::Cmd::run` for new code instead of `run_command` (we recently moved that code into it's own perl module) interface is identical > + ['systemctl', 'is-active', '--quiet', 'postfix@-'], > + noerr => 1, > + ); on several machines of mine this does return an error: ``` root@pve:~# systemctl is-active --quiet postfix@- root@pve:~# echo $? 3 ``` sure it's the right unit to check and restart? also, '$active' sounds like must be set to >0 if the unit is active and code below looks like we restart it if it's not running better name could be $is_active_error (or something like that, i'm not the best at naming either ;) ) > + PVE::Tools::run_command(['systemctl', 'restart', 'postfix@-']) if $active == 0; > + }; > + warn "failed to restart postfix - $@" if $@; > + > return; > }, > });