Ramalama's latest activity
-
RRamalama replied to the thread [SOLVED] Can't mount Hetzner Storage Box CIFS.This Thread is a bit old, but i found out that the Issue with Hetzner Storage Box is not Proxmox or any Samba Versions.... Its Hetzner's Firewall! I have at home luckilly 2 Internet Providers, Cable (Vodafone) and DSL (Telekom). Over Telekom, i...
-
RRamalama reacted to KciNicK's post in the thread AMD : BSOD unsupported processor since Windows build 26100.4202+ ( update kb5060842 + its preview kb5058499 ) with
Like.
it means without proxmox, direct install on the server -
RRamalama reacted to KciNicK's post in the thread AMD : BSOD unsupported processor since Windows build 26100.4202+ ( update kb5060842 + its preview kb5058499 ) with Like.
it's a qemu issue
-
RRamalama replied to the thread AMD : BSOD unsupported processor since Windows build 26100.4202+ ( update kb5060842 + its preview kb5058499 ).Maybe this helps, i tried on all my AMD Servers. Since others confirmed only AMD is affected, i didn't tested Intel Servers, but i can (have a lot of them) Tested: W11 26100.4351 and W11 26200.5651 Ryzen 7 5800X -> Crash Ryzen 9 9955HX -> Crash...
-
RRamalama replied to the thread [SOLVED] MS-A2 9955hx -> Host Type CPU doesnt work for Windows VM's.Thanks, this was indeed my issue :-( args: -cpu 'host,arch_capabilities=off' fixed it!
-
RRamalama reacted to MarkusKo's post in the thread [SOLVED] MS-A2 9955hx -> Host Type CPU doesnt work for Windows VM's with Like.
There is a problem with the newest windows update with amd cpu's, see here
-
RRamalama posted the thread [SOLVED] MS-A2 9955hx -> Host Type CPU doesnt work for Windows VM's in Proxmox VE: Installation and configuration.EDIT: Duplicate Thread! Correct Thread: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/amd-bsod-unsupported-processor-since-windows-build-26100-4202-update-kb5060842-its-preview-kb5058499.166828/page-3#post-779003 ------ I have a new Server, (14 servers in...
-
RRamalama replied to the thread Opt-in Linux 6.14 Kernel for Proxmox VE 8 available on test & no-subscription.1. AMD EPYC 9374F -> 6.14.5-1-bpo12-pve -> No Issues 2. AMD EPYC 9374F -> 6.14.5-1-bpo12-pve -> No Issues 3. AMD Ryzen 7 5800X -> 6.14.4-1-pve -> No Issues (But IOMMU Groups changed numbers, had to adjust) 4. Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-1315U ->...
-
RRamalama reacted to velocity08's post in the thread ZFS Datastore on PBS - ZFS Recordsize/Dedup... with Like.
I've run into a similar backup throughput limit > PBS. so you're not alone.
-
RRamalama reacted to Neobin's post in the thread QEMU 9.2 available on pvetest and pve-no-subscription as of now with Like.
https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/chapter-qm.html#qm_system_settings -> "PVE Machine Revision" https://git.proxmox.com/?p=qemu-server.git;a=commit;h=57db7085b85a0aad45c37e2077f591b41acc933a
-
RRamalama replied to the thread PROXMOX ON A BAREMETAL SERVER WITH 18 x 3.84TB NVMe (ZFS?).You cant place dual controllers in 2 separate buildings. Blades have at least a separate mainboard, separate memory and separate CPUs, compared to 2 controllers in the same node. I hung up for the mechanical Layout, because thats how HA is...
-
RRamalama replied to the thread PROXMOX ON A BAREMETAL SERVER WITH 18 x 3.84TB NVMe (ZFS?).We buyed JovianDSS before 2022 and compared against TrueNas. At that time there was definitive no true HA on TrueNas. If things were different at that time, we would have gone TrueNas 100%. Especially because its surely cheaper. And Dual...
-
RRamalama replied to the thread QEMU 9.2 available on pvetest and pve-no-subscription as of now.maybe i missed something, but what is 9.2+pve1 ?
-
RRamalama replied to the thread PROXMOX ON A BAREMETAL SERVER WITH 18 x 3.84TB NVMe (ZFS?).Just readed, they talk about resilient replication, so i think its still the same periodically and simple zfs-send/receive. Even if its made every 5 seconds, its not the same. On JovianDSS (zfs) and Synology (btrfs) every blockchange gets...
-
RRamalama replied to the thread PROXMOX ON A BAREMETAL SERVER WITH 18 x 3.84TB NVMe (ZFS?).I know, we were in a decision some years ago. We wanted an zfs over iscsi solution that was able to run in HA. At that time we used Synology HA with iscsi for the esxi servers and needed to replace that, because Synology iscsi had some issues...
-
RRamalama replied to the thread PROXMOX ON A BAREMETAL SERVER WITH 18 x 3.84TB NVMe (ZFS?).And Synology is not garbage at all, you probably aware only about the home stuff. There are RS Servers, which run in proper high-availibilty and has xeons with ecc memory. Additionally to that, there is no other solution that im aware of, that...
-
RRamalama replied to the thread PROXMOX ON A BAREMETAL SERVER WITH 18 x 3.84TB NVMe (ZFS?).1. 12-15 Proxmox Servers alone. 2. There is no word about metadata off, i tested with metadata all and metadata only. 3. Block size on disks is 4kb native, on 7450/7500/cm7-r you can reformat the disks to different blocksizes either. 4. Others...
-
RRamalama replied to the thread PROXMOX ON A BAREMETAL SERVER WITH 18 x 3.84TB NVMe (ZFS?).BTRFS is used on Synology for a decade as default Filesystem. And im running 12x Kioxia CM7-R in BTRFS Raid-10 + 8x Micron 7450 Max in BTRFS Raid 10 a little over a Month now. No issues so far. But its true that BTRFS was in the past a little...
-
RRamalama replied to the thread PROXMOX ON A BAREMETAL SERVER WITH 18 x 3.84TB NVMe (ZFS?).You are simply a noob, read first the GitHub issue to the end. Btrfs is comparable to zfs in Performance on hdds, maybe on normal consumer ssds. But im talking about 20gbs write speed and 40gbs read speeds and about millions of iops. As long...
-
RRamalama replied to the thread PROXMOX ON A BAREMETAL SERVER WITH 18 x 3.84TB NVMe (ZFS?).Depends on the drives, in my case with 8x Micron 7450/7500 Max Drives in a Raid10, i switched from ZFS to Btrfs. Btrfs is especially on mysql Databases 5-10x as fast as ZFS. And in almost every other situation Btrfs is at least 2x faster. I...