Am 22.03.21 um 11:01 schrieb Fabian Grünbichler:
On March 22, 2021 9:56 am, Fabian Ebner wrote:
Am 19.03.21 um 15:16 schrieb Fabian Grünbichler:
On March 19, 2021 2:49 pm, Fabian Ebner wrote:
it's cheap and saves code.
but also changes behaviour in a non-backwards-compatible fashion.
previously, if a disk was already on a storage that does not have images
configured, and the migration leaves it on that storage, this config
mismatch was ignored (hence the "grandfather in existing mismatches"
comment). note that users might be able to migrate, but not able to
change storage.cfg to fix this "misconfiguration".
What about the recent change [0] in pve-storage then, i.e. not listing
VM disks for storages without an appropriate content type?
I'd have to think more about that (I mean, it obviously makes sense, the
question is whether it breaks something ;))
For referenced volumes on storages without an 'image' or 'rootfs'
content type, it does break updating the disk size before migration.
I'd argue that unreferenced images that lie on storages without an
'image' content type should not be picked up in the first place. If we
don't agree on this, then [0] needs to be reverted...
but this is not just about unreferenced disks? I mean, this code runs
for ALL disks returned by pve-storage. if pve-storage now filters, then
this does not apply for the '"old == new" storage which has wrong content
type' scenario, since this part of the code thinks there are no volumes
there, so what I originally thought is broken is not,
It does apply when the content type of the storage is only 'rootfs' for
example (and we don't currently have a dependency bump on the new
pve-storage behavior ;)
If we do agree on this, we should double down on [0] and actually be
precise about the content type in vdisk_list by either:
A) adding a content/guest type parameter to vdisk_list.
B) adapting the call sites to filter storages.
Afterwards, this patch could be applied with the appropriate dependency
bump ;)
Note that referenced unused images will still be picked up by the
PVE::QemuServer::foreach_volid iteration, no matter what the content
type of their storage is.
but this would then mean that for referenced images, '"old != new"
storage where both old and new storage have wrong content type' now
suddenly works where it previously didn't? not because of this patch,
but because of vdisk_list not returning those, thus skipping the check
that is changed in this patch? oh, and shared storages with wrong
content type also just work, but since we don't really touch volumes
there anyway with migration that's probably fine..
For shared ones, we skip the scan, and if there is a --targetstorge map,
there already is a check as part of the API call itself.
IFF we want to say "wrong content type" is wrong and should make the VM
unmigratable, we should probably move the check into test_volid so that
it catches ALL volumes always..
But there might be more subtle things like the disk size issue, so I'd
be in favor of reverting [0] (for now) and instead adapting the image
removal on VM destruction to not scan storages without 'images' content.
[0]:
https://git.proxmox.com/?p=pve-storage.git;a=commit;h=a44c18925d223a971296801a0985db34707ada4d
Signed-off-by: Fabian Ebner <[email protected]>
---
PVE/QemuMigrate.pm | 7 ++-----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/PVE/QemuMigrate.pm b/PVE/QemuMigrate.pm
index 3597cc9..44cecce 100644
--- a/PVE/QemuMigrate.pm
+++ b/PVE/QemuMigrate.pm
@@ -410,11 +410,8 @@ sub sync_disks {
$log_error->("storage '$targetsid' is not available on node
'$self->{node}'")
if !$target_scfg;
- # grandfather in existing mismatches
- if ($targetsid ne $storeid && $target_scfg) {
- $log_error->("content type 'images' is not available on storage
'$targetsid'")
- if !$target_scfg->{content}->{images};
- }
+ $log_error->("content type 'images' is not available on storage
'$targetsid'")
+ if $target_scfg && !$target_scfg->{content}->{images};
PVE::Storage::foreach_volid($dl, sub {
my ($volid, $sid, $volinfo) = @_;
--
2.20.1
_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
