Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH container v6 1/4] fix #3711: lxc: print warning if storage for mounted volume does not exist anymore

["Michael Köppl via pve-devel" <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 4837 bytes --]

From: "Michael Köppl" <m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>, Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH container v6 1/4] fix #3711: lxc: print warning if storage for mounted volume does not exist anymore
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 09:29:47 +0200
Message-ID: <746f07c0-6038-44cd-9388-8445a8400069@proxmox.com>

On 5/22/25 08:17, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> Am 20.05.25 um 11:08 schrieb Michael Köppl:
>> An explicit check for the existence of the storage is added to print a
>> warning and continue with the removal of the container without deleting
>> the mount point in case the storage does not exist anymore. For other
>> errors, the function should still die.
> 
> And something else, while this is IMO fine to do for now as stop-gap, it
> might be good to also improve the removal of storage entries, like e.g.,
> if the storage is still available then check if there are any volumes
> on the storage that our code recognizes, and if, prompt the user if they
> still want to remove the storage entry, as that would make those volumes
> unusable. Ideally we would join that info with them being actually used,
> like a disk in a VM.
> The same holds for jobs being defined that use that storage, like backup or
> replication (well that always works on guest disks, so that would be
> covered already).
> 
> For clarity: I do not suggest adding some "auto prune everything", that's
> a tad to dangerous in the storage config panel/api. Albeit some multi
> select + delete (and other operations that make sense, like move to other
> storage I guess) could be nice, that probably should go into the storage
> content UI/API.
> 
> Again, nothing wrong with this here, one can still always remove storage
> entries directly, and improving UX on such edge cases is always nice.

Thanks for having a look and for the feedback. I'd like to implement
some sort of multi-select solution as an extension to this, but as a
separate series. I have it on my TODO list, though, as the solution
implemented by this patch at least gives some warning, but it's
certainly not optimal.



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel