Yes, your understanding is correct.
If for whatever reason the new subscription didnt get replaced correctly, you can attempt with --force option:
pvesubscription update --force
I am also not sure if LVM-Thin can be safely shared between different nodes?
Currently if the backend storage support thin-provisioning and discard, then (I think) you are more less having the same features as if its "LVMthin over iscsi".
I mean...
https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/pbs-acme-order-kann-nicht-abgeschlossen-werden.176240/post-863521
Does it resolve when automatic updater run now? from above thread 2 reports mentioned it worked without change
I think the upgrade is necessary in any case since PVE7/Debian 11 is EOL.
I found one thread related to Intel E810 NICs, where it was observed it can be related to causing memory leaks...
I'm not aware of an official PVE specific source but if you care, here's some of my opinions about it. This heavilly depends on the storage type.
My experience is with ZFS and LVM-Thin, which are also what I recommend, in that order
I haven't...
Interesting topic, I am not aware of performance impact with keeping snapshot for too long or more snapshots means less performance.
Indeed "snapshots are no backups" is to be taken seriously therefore ensure to always have your scheduled backup...
Is your NICs Broadcom bnxt_en NICs?
I edited my first comment if thats can be tested (Ensure you have access via IPMI/iDRAC and take backup of /etc/network/interfaces so you can easily revert things)
Yes that is correct, the proxmox server cant ping anything on the default vlan network. Surprizingly it started working this morning after I left it untouched all sunday. I will try to duplicate the problem if I can.
So when you set
bridge-vlan-aware yes
You lose connectivity?
Is your NICs Broadcom bnxt_en NICs?
P.S
I would think it should work with the below:
auto vmbr0
iface vmbr0 inet static
address 10.1.1.10/24
gateway 10.1.1.1...
I am sure there are better lists-of-recommendations than this adhoc reply, but here we go:
installation from an USB stick may fail in different modes depending on the tool used to put the image on it. Don't use wrappers like Ventoy. (Ventoy is...
One thing to add maybe, do you plan to heavily use snapshot/backup on NFS?
If yes, then keep in mind that , there's a known behavior for VMs whose disks uses qcow2 format on file-level storage (without snapshot-as-volume-chain) [0].
As explained...
Yes its actually prerequisites for the upgrade to PVE9:
https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Upgrade_from_8_to_9#Prerequisites
Also, in general regarding the upgrade, ensure to double check the known issue in the wiki:
Roadmap Proxmox VE 8.4 known...
There was similar report with issues with Nvidia vGPU when the CPU Type was set to host [1]. Setting the CPU type to host enables all CPU flags, meaning that features like Virtualization-based Security (VBS) are enabled.
Could you try to set the...
You are right,
I just checked the Debian package tracker and version 1.4.6 is indeed flagged as "A new upstream version is available... consider packaging it.":
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/clamav
Seems the Debian maintainers haven't compiled...
We do this for all upgrades. We probably should have done this on all nodes straight away when it was in this state, but you live and learn right.
Disarming HA should have probably been our first step.
ClamAV updates automatically via the clamav-freshclam.service, which run continuously in the background.
Check:
~# systemctl status clamav-freshclam
PMG uses clamav from debian upstream - once they have an updated version - you will get it...
If you have not done so yet, save system journal from each host as far in the past as it allows you. At this point its probably your only lifeline to RCA. I know the hindsight is 20/20, but the best time for data collection was, unfortunately...
That was the only node that didn't have fast set.
We think we had something further back that caused an issue on dbus and eventually we got a lock on the fusefs, and corosync just eventually died and rebooted everything.
We're evaluating...
I am not exactly sure if this the current issue you observed, but since bonding is used, the following recommendation from Proxmox documentation applies:
See 5.8.2. Corosync Over Bonds...