UdoB's latest activity
-
UdoB replied to the thread FYI: ZFS pool SUSPENDED not recognized / handled - even with HA VMs starving.Yeah, you have absolutely valid points. That's why I emphasized "_my_" pov ;-) -
UdoB replied to the thread Restored a container backup, lost all my data on non-backup disk.ZFS hat its own semantic: ~# zfs create rpool/data/subvol-9999-disk-0 ~# touch /rpool/data/subvol-9999-disk-0/dummyfile ~# ls -al /rpool/data/subvol-9999-disk-0/ total 2 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 3 Sep 19 21:06 . drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4 Sep 19...
-
das rauf und runterfahren ist kein Problem da macht man einfach nen Hook-Script das den Server vor Starten des Backups entweder per WOL oder die Steckdose schaltet, das selbe beim Ende vom Backup einfach sagen das der Server runterfahren soll und...
-
UdoB replied to the thread FYI: ZFS pool SUSPENDED not recognized / handled - even with HA VMs starving.I did not. My VMs got stuck. For monitoring? Sure. In this specific case "zed" man zed is probably sufficient. This is by far the simplest approach as it watches exclusively ZFS. Then there are a zillion full blown monitoring solutions out...
-
UdoB reacted to iwannabfishn's post in the thread How to move a VM from one cluster to another with
Like.
Proxmox Datacenter looks like a perfect solution. I hadn't installed the Alpha, but I will install the Beta and see how to use it. This looks like an easier way to manage multiple clusters. Thanks! -
UdoB reacted to mr44er's post in the thread [TUTORIAL] FabU: Can I use ZFS RaidZ for my VMs? with Like.
If you know what you're doing this is fine. Personally I like it split, so I can anytime do a reinstall on pool1, just reimport the untouched pool2 etc. and everything gets the IOPS it needs. pool1 (slow, cheap drives) for proxmox, pool2 for VMs...
-
I just got it working this week, and after having 401 errors myself, I found out that on some tutorials, the value of the Macro '{$PVE.TOKEN.ID}' was wrong. It has to be 'USER@REALM!TOKENID' (as mentioned on the template page by Zabbix), and some...
-
Why is everyone using passive voice when recounting that "consumer drives are discouraged?" by whom? and under what circumstances? There is nothing INHERENTLY wrong with using non enterprise drives for zfs pools, as long as you understand the...
-
UdoB replied to the thread VE und PBS auf gleicher Hardware - wie Upgrade?.Einfach beide Anleitungen parallel lesen und ausführen. Das hat zumindest bei meinem kleinen Mini-PC einwandfrei funktioniert. :-) https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Upgrade_from_8_to_9 https://pbs.proxmox.com/wiki/Upgrade_from_3_to_4 Huh??? Du...
-
UdoB replied to the thread How to move a VM from one cluster to another.Did you test https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/proxmox-datacenter-manager-0-9-beta-released.171742/ ? While it may copy more data than technically required it is made for multi-cluster management...
-
UdoB replied to the thread Shared media storage accross multiple guests.Great! But then... your first sentence... ...was wrong. The article talks about LXC, not VMs!
-
Das wäre die Aufgabe eines Router oder einer Firewall. Netzwerke sollen immer getrennt sein und nur über FW regeln miteinander reden. eine VM erstellen mit OpnSense ;-)
-
you can also use crontab -e on your Proxmox and insert this to your daily job: #VM 200 (daily reboot 07:30 Uhr) 30 7 * * * /usr/sbin/qm reboot 200 200 is the ID of your VM.
-
They could use a third-party source supported by PAM, e.g. freeIPA
-
UdoB reacted to MarkusKo's post in the thread Doubts about using system files for different disk partitions with Like.
If the "NonRAID" is HBA mode then yes. I would go for ZFS mirror (like RAID-10), not RAID-Z1 (like RAID-5) because that will perform way better. Are this enterprise grade ssd's? If you use consumer grade ssd's ZFS is not a good idea, then you...
-
@UdoB You are 100% correct and thanks for calling it out! Tables without units are incomplete. I've updated the table headers to clarify appropriate units. Cheers Blockbridge : Ultra low latency all-NVME shared storage for Proxmox -...
-
UdoB replied to the thread CEPH Erasure Coded Configuration: Review/Confirmation.I am sure some people do. Three nodes is the absolute minimum, as official documents tell. While I do not run Ceph currently I did use it last year - in my Homelab; some findings...
-
UdoB reacted to VictorSTS's post in the thread CEPH Erasure Coded Configuration: Review/Confirmation with Like.
Each K and M must be in a different host because you want your fault domain to be host (the default), not disk: i.e. if fault domain was disk you may end up with too many K or M (or both!) for some PGs in the same host and if that host goes down...
-
The best practice is to have a dedicated HBA-Controller for your storage devices (e.G. a SATA-HBA Controller or a RAID-Controller in HBA/IT-Mode) and pass it through via PCI...