bbgeek17's latest activity
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Problem with SANs on a three node cluster.ZFS over iSCSI in PVE is a specific scheme that implies: a) There is an external storage device b) You can login to this server via SSH as root (this excludes Dell, Netapp, Hitachi, etc) c) There is internal storage in that server (HDD, SAS... -
bbgeek17 replied to the thread iSCSI interfaces.PVE is trying to connect to all Portals that are advertised by iSCSI Target. There is no mechanism in PVE today that allows for filtering of the Portal connectivity. You may want to look at the Truenas side to see if there is anything you can do...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Problem with SANs on a three node cluster.Ok, you can ignore everything I said. @alexskysilk is correct in the direction you should be troubleshooting. You used a word combination that has very specific meaning in the PVE context "zfs over iscsi". However, you are just using straight...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Problem with SANs on a three node cluster.Keep in mind that OP is using ZFS/iSCSI scheme. ZFS volumes on the storage sever, their iSCSI exporting, and PVE iSCSI are managed by the native storage plugin. In fact, if I remember correctly, iscsiadm is not used. This approach uses built-in...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Problem with SANs on a three node cluster.Thank you for clarifying. There are many ZFS experts in this forum, I am not one of them. That said, I suspect that the ZFS/iSCSI plugin is sufficiently different from the Local ZFS plugin, where the ZFS replication is primarily integrated and...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread <span>nodename</span> showing up in front of everything.Thank you for sharing, @Hank42. In your post #25, it stood out to me that you mentioned holding some packages while upgrading others. In general, this is not a good idea. The various components of the system are interconnected, and partial...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Problem with SANs on a three node cluster.Can you clarify, did you build DIY type storage servers that are running some sort of Linux and organizes the storage with ZFS internally? This is not an appliance type SAN? And these two storage servers are independent of each other...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Proxmox + NVMe/TCP : Is LVM-thin supported and suitable for fast VM provisioning?.You may have to live with the current deployment time until a technical solution is implemented to address this limitation. There may be something on the horizon, but I do not have visibility into the development priorities of Proxmox Server...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Proxmox + NVMe/TCP : Is LVM-thin supported and suitable for fast VM provisioning?.Hi @lxiosjao , No. I am not sure if the new tech-preview PVE9 LVM snapshot-as-volume-chain may optimize anything for you. If I recall correctly, it still require 100% space overhead reservation for snapshots/clones. Blockbridge : Ultra low...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread <span>nodename</span> showing up in front of everything.@Hank42, have you installed helper scripts on your system at any point? Blockbridge : Ultra low latency all-NVME shared storage for Proxmox - https://www.blockbridge.com/proxmox
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Problem with SANs on a three node cluster.Hi @Ghosthawk , welcome to the forum. Can you please specify what SAN type/model you are using? Blockbridge : Ultra low latency all-NVME shared storage for Proxmox - https://www.blockbridge.com/proxmox
-
The official docs: And the specific documentation for LVM: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Storage:_LVM Please note LVM, NOT Lvm/thin, they are not the same. LVM/thin doesn't work with shared storage like a FC san, LVM works. Following writeups...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread FC SAN cluster in proxmox.Hi @nbani, @floh8 is correct. You can present the FC storage to all nodes in the cluster, configure the Multipath, and then layer the LVM that PVE can operate on as Storage Pool. The reason the FC is not called out in those documents, is because...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread <span>nodename</span> showing up in front of everything.https://www.reddit.com/r/Proxmox/s/KrmvrSdtmR Blockbridge : Ultra low latency all-NVME shared storage for Proxmox - https://www.blockbridge.com/proxmox
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Shared ISCSI Storage VG's?.There may be a slight advantage of having multiple LUNs and Multiple Targets from a queue depth perspective. However, that generally applies to very high performance storage with fast clients. Without knowing anything about your performance...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Shared ISCSI Storage VG's?.Hi @ajezierski , welcome to the forum. You need to create LVM using the Multipath DM device, not the underlying direct physical devices. So to answer your question - one VG per unique LUN. In your case 3 Volume groups (or you can combine your...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Hostname cloud-init.We use simple bash script for our workflow. Blockbridge : Ultra low latency all-NVME shared storage for Proxmox - https://www.blockbridge.com/proxmox
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread Hostname cloud-init.PVE does not use Vendor section of the CI. I believe the hostname is set via metadata file when built-in CI is used You can easily check this by mounting the ISO after VM has booted and examining the content of the files. local-hostname"...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread [SOLVED] Cannot extend volume group ( over iscsi )..Hi @alma21, There is no mechanism to do so. Theoretically, a window exists where both operations could be executed at the same time. In practice, however, the likelihood of this happening is very low. This is especially true in a business...
-
bbgeek17 replied to the thread LVM-Thin oder ZFS.Bieten Sie die Vorteile von Berliner vs. Pfannkuchen vs. Krapfen Blockbridge : Ultra low latency all-NVME shared storage for Proxmox - https://www.blockbridge.com/proxmox
