From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dietmar@proxmox.com>
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))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB15E62596
 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 08:00:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B69B516A5B
 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 07:59:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [212.186.127.180])
 (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 firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 44BF916A4D
 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 07:59:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 13F1343011
 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 07:59:51 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 07:59:36 +0200 (CEST)
From: Dietmar Maurer <dietmar@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <1368834871.556.1594619977103@webmail.proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <4e38b093-6a1f-1a04-1ebb-dfa6014f3196@gmail.com>
References: <78148244-01b5-0921-7d78-c4517c231e47@gmail.com>
 <568120523.549.1594571306775@webmail.proxmox.com>
 <4e38b093-6a1f-1a04-1ebb-dfa6014f3196@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.3-Rev15
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.017 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 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
Subject: Re: [PVE-User] BackupServer Feature Request - Compression display
X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-user>, 
 <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-user/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user>, 
 <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 06:00:21 -0000

> Maybe I'm missing your point, but I wasn't meaning the incremental 
> display of read/write during backup (though I had noticed that changed), 
> but just the end result of how much data is stored.

This would mean to touch all chunks at the server to get the compressed
size. That is possible, but slow down the whole process.

I guess that would remove the "wow, that was fast" effect...

Maybe we can gather such stats during garbage collection...