From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EEB21FF165 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2025 14:04:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2A880112DC; Thu, 14 Aug 2025 14:05:56 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2025 14:05:51 +0200 From: Wolfgang Bumiller To: "DERUMIER, Alexandre" Message-ID: References: <9d5353263ee0aa3ee67d8d331f674f8a00044b1e.camel@groupe-cyllene.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9d5353263ee0aa3ee67d8d331f674f8a00044b1e.camel@groupe-cyllene.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1755173118868 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.076 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 pve-storage] lvm: use blkdiscard instead cstream to saferemove drive 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: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Cc: "pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 10:07:59AM +0000, DERUMIER, Alexandre wrote: > > +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 saferemove_discard =3D> { > > +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 description =3D> "Wipe with discard = instead zeroing.", > > +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 type =3D> 'boolean', > = > >>Not sure we need this (not sure when this is actually useful), but > >>it's > >>cheap enough to have around. Should add a `default =3D> 0` for > >>documentation purposes, though. > = > Some storage allow overprovisioning. (create a lun bigger than the real > storage size), it can be interesting to discard instead zeroing (to > free space on storage side). > as snapshots currently use lvm volume with same size than the main > volume, it can be interesting to have overprovisioning. But this does not guarantee that the data is actually erased/zeroed, in which case I'd just disable the thing altogether (but then again I use `issue_discards` in lvm.conf to cause `lvremove` to discard the whole thing... ;-) _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel