[pve-devel] [PATCH manager v5 05/16] api: replication: add 'replication-job' to notification metadata

[Lukas Wagner]

On  2024-04-19 14:02, Fiona Ebner wrote:
> Am 15.04.24 um 10:26 schrieb Lukas Wagner:
>> This allows users to create notification match rules for specific
>> replication jobs, if they so desire.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lukas Wagner <l.wagner at proxmox.com>
>> ---
>>  PVE/API2/Replication.pm | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/PVE/API2/Replication.pm b/PVE/API2/Replication.pm
>> index 0dc944c9..703640f5 100644
>> --- a/PVE/API2/Replication.pm
>> +++ b/PVE/API2/Replication.pm
>> @@ -140,8 +140,8 @@ my sub _handle_job_err {
>>      };
>>  
>>      my $metadata_fields = {
>> -	# TODO: Add job-id?
>>  	type => "replication",
>> +	"replication-job" => $job->{id},
>>      };
>>  
>>      eval {
> 
> Not sure if we should use "replication-job" and "backup-job" for the
> metadata entries rather then just "job-id". The type is already
> something that can be matched, why re-do it implicitly with the field
> name? E.g. I want to see all jobs with -fiona- on the system, now I'd
> have to create a matcher rule for each job type.

Had a 'job-id' field at first, but I *think* (can't be too sure after more than 
4 months of not working on this) the reason why I changed it to this approach
were the replication job IDs, which look like '100-0' or similar.
Giving them and other job IDs a unique field made it a bit easier to
understand what is what when creating a matcher in the improved UI.

For instance, if you just have 'job-id', the pre-filled combo box in the 
match-field edit UI might contain these values

  - backup-gaasdgh7asdfg
  - 100-0
  - 101-0

IMO it's a bit hard to understand that the last two are replication jobs. The separate
job fields make this easier.


-- 
- Lukas