Recent content by dakralex

To clarify this here, this is the expected behavior for the given HA affinity rule set. Essentially, if the HA resource has failback enabled (which it has by default) and is part of a node affinity rule with node priority classes, the HA resource can only be placed on nodes from the highest...

Sorry for the late reply, missed this thread in the new posts section. This was already stated some of the other answers, but this is the expected behavior: HA resources are by default configured with "failback" enabled. Failback in that sense means that whenever a higher priority node...

Hi! If I understand your description correctly, this is expected behavior. As HA resources are "failback" by default and the HA resource is in a non-strict node affinity rule, the HA Manager does not allow the migration. This is because the HA resource would be moved immediately back to the...

Hi, sorry for the late reply! At least for two rooms this is already possible with non-strict node affinity rules as these will fallback to the other available cluster nodes if none of the specified nodes are available anymore. However, an HA resource cannot be specified in a...

The SIGSEGV is a very different cause to end a process here, so that seems quite unrelated to the previous SIGABRT signals. Could you specify the hardware these cluster nodes are running on? Does a longer-running memtest or a stresstest with e.g. stress-ng show any signs of hardware failure?

Unfortunately, we don't have any way to reproduce this on our end yet. One way to be able to have some more information about this would be to look at the process' coredump as a SIGABRT will cause this. See if there is any coredump related to these issues in /var/lib/systemd/coredump/ (see [0]...

The safest procedure to disarm the HA stack before these disarm-ha/arm-ha commands were introduced is to stop the pve-ha-lrm service on each node individually, and after these are all confirmed to be 'restart mode' and all HA resources in 'freeze' by ha-manager status and then the pve-ha-crm...

I don't think that pvestatd is related to this issue, because neither pve-ha-crm nor pve-ha-lrm directly depend on pvestatd. I haven't found any clues why pve-ha-lrm in particular is killed with SIGABRT... How was the HP modules blacklisted? Was the pve-ha-lrm.service systemd unit changed in...

Have you started the affected container during the time of this log? You can use journalctl --since '2026-06-12 09:38:00' --until '...' to capture the output between some time span (I filled in the --since with the rough start time of the LXC from your top post). Adding --no-pager might help in...

Does the pve-ha-lrm service acquire its lock on pve1 and pve3 correctly?

Thanks, could you also provide the kernel syslog for the boot before the node rebooted itself?

Hi! Does this happen on a specific cluster node or all cluster nodes? What kind of watchdog is used on the node(s) where this happens? Are there any kernel parameters set? Does any other software on the cluster nodes compete for the /dev/watchdog device? Otherwise, it would still be good to...

No worries, and the manual can always be improved though I didn't put in the technical explanation from above as it felt too specific. If it's useful there as well, I can certainly find a way to put it there without being too distracting from the main functionality ;)

Hi! In more detail, each node's current cpu and memory usage is normalized with its own capacity (i.e. cpu_load = current_cpu / max_cpu and memory_load = current_memory / max_memory), where the node's current load is then a equal-weighted average of that (i.e. (cpu_load + memory_load) / 2...

Hi! Yes, this is a known issue and is currently tracked with this Bugzilla entry [0]. [0] https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=7053