From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 2F96F64FE5 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 10:17:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2282C20BB7 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 10:17:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.bdick.de (he3.bdick.de [136.243.64.144]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 5C70E20BA9 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 10:17:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from ip-88-153-16-148.hsi04.unitymediagroup.de ([88.153.16.148] helo=[192.168.1.101]) by mail.bdick.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kZVxk-0000JG-Ve; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 10:17:17 +0100 To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox VE user list References: <1bea39e7-d656-d809-0774-baa935479f53@bdick.de> <7d0ea9da-3b9e-d9da-a2f6-1c7f5eca11f8@proxmox.com> <746ccce3-578f-c75d-8958-f3776b7f1166@bdick.de> <9c16c66e-6a83-4da9-84e8-28efa0ff7c3a@proxmox.com> From: Bernhard Dick Message-ID: <761c2c57-6f30-b784-2233-284ed20dc2cb@bdick.de> Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 10:17:10 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9c16c66e-6a83-4da9-84e8-28efa0ff7c3a@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: de-DE Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.064 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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] Backup broken? X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 09:17:24 -0000 Hi, Am 01.11.2020 um 20:48 schrieb Thomas Lamprecht: > On 01.11.20 14:14, Bernhard Dick wrote: >> I can even reproduce this behaviour by triggering the global Backup job from the web console. If I backup single VMs/Containers from the Host part of the web console it runs fine, however the global job removes also those backups when it is running. > > Yes, there was a regression with this when adopting the newer prune "keep-daily", > "keep-weekly", ... logic. It acts quite different internally, but the storage > special case for maxfiles==0 was handled rather implicit, thus this did not > rang any alarm bells. I transformed it to a more explicit logic and we'll > add some more extensive test for this special case, so that it won't happen again. > > The fix is packaged in pve-manager version 6.2-15, currently available on pvetest. > You can either add the pvetest repository[0], do `apt update && apt install pve-manager`, > then drop the test repo again, or manually download and install it, with using > `apt install` this still checks if the package is valid (i.e., signed by a trusted > key): > > # wget http://download.proxmox.com/debian/pve/dists/buster/pvetest/binary-amd64/pve-manager_6.2-15_amd64.deb > # apt install ./pve-manager_6.2-15_amd64.deb > I tried it now and it works as expected. So thanks for fixing this fast. Regards Bernhard > thanks for your report! > > regards, > Thomas > > > [0]: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Package_Repositories > >