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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D80E64EC7 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 20:49:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 57D551D601 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 20:48:44 +0100 (CET) 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 B4DB11D5F4 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 20:48:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7A21E45F6E; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 20:48:42 +0100 (CET) To: Proxmox VE user list , Bernhard Dick References: <1bea39e7-d656-d809-0774-baa935479f53@bdick.de> <7d0ea9da-3b9e-d9da-a2f6-1c7f5eca11f8@proxmox.com> <746ccce3-578f-c75d-8958-f3776b7f1166@bdick.de> From: Thomas Lamprecht Message-ID: <9c16c66e-6a83-4da9-84e8-28efa0ff7c3a@proxmox.com> Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2020 20:48:41 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:83.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/83.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <746ccce3-578f-c75d-8958-f3776b7f1166@bdick.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.008 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 -0.257 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com] 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: Sun, 01 Nov 2020 19:49:14 -0000 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 pa= rt of the web console it runs fine, however the global job removes also t= hose 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 sto= rage special case for maxfiles=3D=3D0 was handled rather implicit, thus this d= id 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 happ= en 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 insta= ll 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 thanks for your report! regards, Thomas [0]: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Package_Repositories