Search results

I have the same issue on all 7 Proxmox Servers, but only with W11 VM's (i think since the 24h2 update). On all W7/W10/Server 2016/2019/2022, there aren't any issues and everything is Perfect.

Can you try to Pin all your VM-Cores to the same Socket on your host? numactl --hardware So that all Cores of VM1 runs on Socket1, VM2 on Socket2 and so on? Dont forget to shutdown/start the VM or LXC Container after you changed the config. Just for testing, to rule that out.

Do you use primarycache=metadata or something else on zfs?

Sure i readed that and tryed almost anything on that AMD sheet. About intel, im curious either, but as far i seen the new intel chiplet design is using some sort of a silicon base for the interconnect, which is very expensive but very fast. So i have the fear that it wouldn't be an issue on...

numastat hit/misses doesnt tell the whole story sadly, we had this already. I believe that the host-kernel (numastat) cannot track anything inside a VM behind the guest kernel, but thats only an assumption so far. i knew i would start this stupid discussion again after my initial reply, but...

This would be true if the Kernel would know that vCPUs (Tasks) of a VM are belonging together. But in our case the Kernel is not aware and the vCPU tasks of a single VM starting randomly spreaded across Numa-Nodes. For example if you configure the VM with 4 vCPUs, those Tasks on the Host wont...

If you want to use Proxmox, try to avoid Numa or/and Multisocket Systems. Otherwise use ESXI or anything that supports Numa. Proxmox Numa Support is just helpfull in very rare cases, most of the time its just senseless. The Only way to get it Properly working is with CPU-Pinning (or scripts...

Sure. First you need to create a dataset on your PVE Host and mount it somewhere. Here is an example: root@proxmox:~# zfs list NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT HDD_Z2 21.5T 82.2T 114K /HDD_Z2 HDD_Z2/PVE_Backup 696G 82.2T 696G /PVE_Backup...

Ja deswegen wollte ich auch eigentlich nicht Antworten und geschrieben dass ihr machen sollt was ihr wollt. Hab ja auch keine Lust auf endlose Diskussionen. Am ende ists eh egal. Wenns funkt ist super (viel Arbeit gespart) und wenn nicht kann mann halts fixen. Ist ja Linux und mann hat auch...

LXC-Container sind Managed. Ein Upgrade der Distribution könnte Änderungen an systemd, init oder anderen Kernkomponenten führen, die mit der Art wie der Container verwaltet wird, in Konflikt stehen. Hier ein teil aus ChatGPT was Managed Container bedeutet (Mann kann die auch natürlich auf...

Macht wie ihrs denkt, mir ist das egal. Ich hab alles dazu bereits geschrieben.

Neueres Image laden und dann halt alles auf den neuen Container migrieren, und ja ist natürlich umständlich... Der grund ist halt, das sich in nem LXC Container oft mehr ändert als nur die Packete, Packete werden auch grundsätzlich nie entfernt, nur upgedated/hinzugefügt. (Entfernt auch aber...

Ja mit einem upgrade auf 24.04... Würde ich beim LXC Container aber eher nicht empfehlen Distro upzugraden auch wenns funktioniert. Bei ner VM ist das natürlich kein Problem. Vielleicht helfen die Sources ja trotzdem jemandem, damit er nichtlange googeln muss halt. LG

ändert doch einfach die sources: /etc/apt/sources.list deb http://old-releases.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ mantic main restricted deb http://old-releases.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ mantic-updates main restricted deb http://old-releases.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ mantic universe deb...

Hi fiona :-) You're right, it's just somehow irritating because you are configuring the users/passwords in the Cluster-View, not in the Node-View. To add an Additional Section in the Node View for PAM Users is not the right way i think either, but then it probably should be done or...

Hi, Changing the root password in Datacenter view, changes only the root password (shell) on one Server in the Cluster, not all. That should be fixed :-) Thanks

Copilot+ requires a NPU, maybe a gpu passthrough will work but im not sure. I dont see any copilot+ features either even on my native 13th gen notebook with 24h2 (2033)

Just readed again your link: You mean the second post from ryang? With: numa0: cpus=0-13,hostnodes=0,memory=30720,policy=bind numa1: cpus=14-27,hostnodes=1,memory=30720,policy=bind Thats new lol, i have to try it, thanks for the heading! If that will work then it will be finally amazing, but...

We had this discussion already, enabling numa should bind all the "cores" (threads) of a VM to the same Numa-Node. As long as it's not the case, Numa is almost pointless. The Actual behaviour still spreads all the Cores of a Single VM to all possible physical cores Randomly without taking...

The sata write cache depends... Its a very hard topic, it can be completely pointless nowadays or neccessary. HDDS: Zfs does own queues with the zfs io scheduler. So yes zfs will usually disable any sort of caching anyway. NVME's: Things changes with modern zfs versions for nvme's, because...