Hi everyone,
First of all, Please can I suggest/request that there were dedicated "bug reports*" and "feature requests" forum sections somewhere on here...
Had originally finished this sentence with "or if there is an existing better place for feature requests, then please direct me to it (though would still suggest there being a "stub" forum/sticky post with links to it!)."
But after a bit more searching, have found https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/
Would still be very useful if that was prominently featured here, rather than needing a google search to find it!
* about Bug reports specifically, having a forum to talk about them might be useful, as I'm sure at least some, if not most, are actually not "true" bugs.
It should also be pointed out how strict bugzilla is with its category structure and ability to browse - e.g. would be useful to just be able to browse *ALL* bugs, regardless of their category. (Or perhaps just a suitably crafted search link in the sticky post!)
I'm sure there are a lot of "bugs" which get reported, but in the wrong category, initially at least!
Imho a forum is a better (and perhaps busier!) place for initial reports and discussions about them.
Once it is confirmed that its not just user error, misconfiguration, etc etc, then the next step should be a proper bugzilla report.
But having open discussion about it first (aka. triage), I feel would help
a) get much better initial bugzilla reports
b) be more likely that it goes into the right category to start off with.
c) avoid some/most "non-bug" reports every being created on bugzilla in the first place
All of that is off topic really though lol
Will cross post the following to bugzilla once I work out the "right" categorization for it...
I've got a bad disk in my PVE server, Its non-critical data, and I'm not particularly fussed about it, and when the drive finally actually dies, it will get replaced.
In the mean time, I get regular reports from smartd, eg:
Simple enough for most, but quite unhelpful for me!
This particular pve host has 28 drive bays, mostly full. (Its also feasible to have servers with 50+ disks)
/dev/sdX "mappings" change frequently, so my /etc/fstab for example mounts everything by partition UUID.
The email does state the size, so I know I can just ignore this and not panic,
But the really useful thing to add would be under device/device info, something like
"which is mounted on /path/to/mountpoint" (1)
or (2)
"which is a member of LVM/ZFS <xxxxxx>"
"which is passed through to Container/VM <id> (<name in proxmox>)"
And perhaps others?
(1): This on its own, I would suggest as an enhancement to the standard smartd package, and would be quite easy to do.
(2): This is the nuance bit I think is more proxmox specific, and why I'm suggesting it here as a proxmox feature/enhancement, rather than just for the standard smartd package.
Would welcome any feedback, as I'm happy to contribute the necesary code to achieve this, but not sure which project(s) it would be best directed to.
Also note this is based on a PVE 8.4.1 system, so possible this has changed in newer versions!
First of all, Please can I suggest/request that there were dedicated "bug reports*" and "feature requests" forum sections somewhere on here...
Had originally finished this sentence with "or if there is an existing better place for feature requests, then please direct me to it (though would still suggest there being a "stub" forum/sticky post with links to it!)."
But after a bit more searching, have found https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/
Would still be very useful if that was prominently featured here, rather than needing a google search to find it!
* about Bug reports specifically, having a forum to talk about them might be useful, as I'm sure at least some, if not most, are actually not "true" bugs.
It should also be pointed out how strict bugzilla is with its category structure and ability to browse - e.g. would be useful to just be able to browse *ALL* bugs, regardless of their category. (Or perhaps just a suitably crafted search link in the sticky post!)
I'm sure there are a lot of "bugs" which get reported, but in the wrong category, initially at least!
Imho a forum is a better (and perhaps busier!) place for initial reports and discussions about them.
Once it is confirmed that its not just user error, misconfiguration, etc etc, then the next step should be a proper bugzilla report.
But having open discussion about it first (aka. triage), I feel would help
a) get much better initial bugzilla reports
b) be more likely that it goes into the right category to start off with.
c) avoid some/most "non-bug" reports every being created on bugzilla in the first place
All of that is off topic really though lol
Will cross post the following to bugzilla once I work out the "right" categorization for it...
I've got a bad disk in my PVE server, Its non-critical data, and I'm not particularly fussed about it, and when the drive finally actually dies, it will get replaced.
In the mean time, I get regular reports from smartd, eg:
Simple enough for most, but quite unhelpful for me!
This particular pve host has 28 drive bays, mostly full. (Its also feasible to have servers with 50+ disks)
/dev/sdX "mappings" change frequently, so my /etc/fstab for example mounts everything by partition UUID.
The email does state the size, so I know I can just ignore this and not panic,
But the really useful thing to add would be under device/device info, something like
"which is mounted on /path/to/mountpoint" (1)
or (2)
"which is a member of LVM/ZFS <xxxxxx>"
"which is passed through to Container/VM <id> (<name in proxmox>)"
And perhaps others?
(1): This on its own, I would suggest as an enhancement to the standard smartd package, and would be quite easy to do.
(2): This is the nuance bit I think is more proxmox specific, and why I'm suggesting it here as a proxmox feature/enhancement, rather than just for the standard smartd package.
Would welcome any feedback, as I'm happy to contribute the necesary code to achieve this, but not sure which project(s) it would be best directed to.
Also note this is based on a PVE 8.4.1 system, so possible this has changed in newer versions!