Search results

There are so many modifications in changed subsystems from Debian Buster --> Bullseye --> Bookworm --> Trixie. While I do have some systems (not PVE) which were upgraded from Stretch to now I would choose to create a new install and restore VMs from backup. This seems easier to me - and then...

To separate "the OS" from "the data" is still best practice, yes! For PVE the OS should reside on a mirror, of course. With the constraints of "Mini-PCs" I feel fine to just install PVE on two (or more) devices, in a ZFS mirror. The resulting single ZFS pool ("rpool") is good to use for all...

Yes, technically everything is possible as "everthing is a file". You can stack filesystems on top of block devices as usual and then repeat this step as often as you want to. (Or an LVM physical volume on top of a ZVOL.) The complexity multiplies on each step. And so does the difficulty to...

Unfortunately I have no NFS storage configured, so I can't confirm this. But my only "cifs" share does confirm your observation: no explicit "shared 1" but it is shared.

For VM disks to not being copied the underlying storage needs to be officially tagged "shared". Compare your settings with the table: https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/pve-admin-guide.html#_storage_types And it needs to be actually configured accordingly. Just having "the same" storage on two...

No. But from my perspective it is expected behavior to copy the data from one single machine to another single machine. The alternative is (of course) to build a cluster. Only then the relevant software knows, what "shared storage" means...

What do you mean by "resource intensiv"? CPU load? Slow transfer speed? Not many IOPS? Power consumption? For HDD the limiting factor is always the mechanical behavior of the disks, never the CPU. At least not for the last few decades. If I am offered RaidZ1 plus spare I would always opt for...

Tja, ein klassisches "Catch-22" ;-) Erstens: mach ein Backup vor allen Experimenten! Die "richtige" Lösung könnte der POM sein, der ist explizit für offline-Szenarien gedacht: https://pom.proxmox.com/ "Basteln" kann man mit "apt -d -y full-upgrade", nach dem Umschreiben der sources.list...

Ich mache mal den Erbsenzähler: die Formulierung ist so nicht richtig. Die VM wird nicht erneut komplett gesichert! Aber sie wird auf der Quelle jeweils erneut komplett eingelesen, "gechunked", die Checksumme ermittelt, diese zum PBS gesendet und danach wird erst erkannt, dass dieser Chunk...

A ZFS pools consists of one or more vdevs. Vdevs implement the known topologies: single drive/mirror/RaidZx. When you have more than one vdev the combination in a pool is called "striped". (Nearly) every ZFS pool I have has more than one vdev --> the pool is striped. IOPS scale linear with the...

Well, you can put different sized disks into one pool. "Striped". This is NOT recommended because it removes some very important features! A mirror (and that's what we mostly use in PVE context) needs two (or more) same sized disks. You can force it to use different sizes like your 18+10...

No - the result you've shown is exactly this: two mirrors, striped :-) No, that's not possible. You will have to create a new pool with a single mirror first. (Well, technically a single drive is enough - you can add a second drive to create the first mirror later on. This approach is not...

Sorry, I do not know that. My normal Desktop works with Spice+"VirGL GPU" - and that was your initial question in #1 ;-)

Just for clarity, while the result may look the same, PVE HA is the opposite: not "shoot-the-other-node and live" but "commit suicide" - a node fences itself, by a hard reset.

Naja..., wie du willst ;-) Ich installiere PVE immer auf ZFS. (Und ich habe ein paar klassische, recht alte, Raid-Controller ausgemustert im Schrank liegen...) Sind denn alle Disks gleichwertig, oder sind das SSDs + HDDs? Das wurde anscheinend nirgends erwähnt. Ich unterstelle also mal zwei...

Spätestens seit der Erfindung von ZFS kann man darüber streiten - mit durchaus offenem Ausgang. Ein Hardware-Raid liefert NICHT: herstellerunabhängigkeit; transparente Kompression; garantierte Integrität; (technisch) billige Snapshots; Replikation; einfache Erweiterbarkeit und wohl einige mehr...

War das eine "gute" NVMe (mit PLP; eher unwahrscheinlich) oder etwas billiges? Preiswerte NVMe/SSD neigen im PVE Kontext dazu, nicht sehr lange zu halten. Bitte markiere diesen Thread als "Solved", man kann "oben" den Titel editieren.

Okay, thanks for the reply. This means TrueNAS just sees the "half-virtualized" disks, not the hardware directly. Just be careful and have backups. Even if you know that already I need to point to...

Yes. I am used to use "Virtio-GPU" with Spice. Now I switched a Windows 11 VM to "VirGL GPU" - just for this test. Works the same. For me, in my environment. I do not see/feel any subjective difference and I won't bother to run performance tests.

Out of curiosity: is TrueNAS able to read SMART data of those disks?