Search results

you really should use fleecing option in your backup advanced option. (you can use same ceph rbd storage than your main vm). (btw, I hope than your cephfs storage for your backup is not in the same ceph cluster than your production rbd storage, right ? ;)

It's look like the initramfs don't have the virtio-scsi module. (I have seen this with some almalinux recently coming from vmwarre too) maybe check this doc, it should work on proxmox too ...

It should be isolated without nat. The only way with nat without firewall could be to create vrf like for evpn zones, but It'll need some route leaks between main vrf , so I'm not sure it's reasy without a routing daemon like frr.

systemctl status pve-ha-lrm ? systemctl restart pve-ha-lrm

are all the nodes on the same site/datacenter ? what is the normal network latency between them ?

you don't need fingerprint with signed certificate from an authority (commercial or letsencrypt). only self signed certificated need it

try to boot on ide first Then, you can convert to virtio-scsi - change your controller to virtio-scsi instead lsi - add a second temporary small disk in scsi0 install virtio-win drivers in windows stop the vm delete the temporary disk switch from ide to scsi to your first disk see...

I'll try to get it for pve9 https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/2025-July/072194.html

I can confirm that I had tried with Dell idrac some year ago , and I had a lot of bug with unexpected reboot. Never had problem with softdog. (The only benefit was to have log of the watchdog in the idrac log)

yes, it's a known bug, snat rules management should be improve. (currently they are put as post-up in /etc/network/intefaces , so applied multiple times). It should need some kind of service to manage it. (maybe in new proxmox firewall for example) you can add a ping in this opened issue...

mmm, it's possible that some value are not applied at reload. btw, "static auto" is invalid, it's static or auto ifupdown is able to detect inet|inet6 or static|auto automatically, so it should work if you put accept_ra && autoconf 1 directly in main vmbr0 you can do : "ifreload -a -d"...

the flow is like : vm(103.204.193.X)---->vnet(103.204.193.1)------- default route to exit-node ----->proxmoxnode01(exit-node)---------default gw------------->upstream routeur then in the reverse direction upstream routeur-----route to 103.204.193.0/24 gw "proxmoxnode01 ip"------------------>...

do you have done a reload or a restart of networking service after change ? (a reload shouldn't break you vm, but a restart with detach all vms interfaces, as they are not defined in /etc/network/interfaces)

yes sure, you need to expose a big lun on both side, configure multipath, and add a lvm shared storage on top. (No snapshot && no thin provisioning yet, it should be available in pve9) Just be carefull, you need a third node to keep quorum (proxmox cluster is 3 nodes minimum), don' t need to be...

I don't known what kind of cpu redhat is using, but it's really scaling across multiple threads (around x2~x4 from baselineà. Personnally, I really want to test it on ceph rbd, because it's currently really cpu limited client side around 70k iops. I think that they are still other improvement...

Yes, I known this can increase latency. I need to look to add an option to pin iothread on specific cpu, like for the vm cpu cores. (ideally iothread have dedicated cores and vm cpus other cores, on same numa node than nvme drive) https://vmsplice.net/~stefan/stefanha-kvm-forum-2024.pdf...

it's coming ;) cross-finger for pve9.0

what is your ssd model ?

proxmox don't use storage snasphots for backups. (only vm snapshot really need storage snapshots)

I have wrote a plugin 10 year ago when I was using netapp, (using flexclone,snapvol,..) ,it was nfs based, if somebody want to take some inspiration. (not sure that the netapp sdk is still ok) https://github.com/odiso/proxmox-pve-storage-netapp