Search results

That is what I thought, but I am not sure if this is entirely correct. In the logs you can see this, no matter if the VM was running or not, when using stop mode: INFO: scsi0: dirty-bitmap status: created new So there is some dirty-bitmap that gets created. How that is used? I have no idea and...

Someone else has to chime in. I simply assume it is not possible, since there is no option in the gui or cli or anything written in the docs about concurrent backups AFAIK. IO workers is, well about IO workers (webGUI shows me default of 16 for me), not about how many backup task can run...

Do you need to shutdown VMs to backup them with stop mode? Or is it needlessly loosing uptime by doing so? Here is how I used to think it works: I thought it does not matter if the VM is running or not. In both cases the VM will be shutdown, a complete backup taken, during that the VM will be...

AFAIK that is not possible. That is about IO workers, not about how many VMs are backed up simultaneously. Why would you want to do multiple backups at the same time anyway? If you have a performance bottleneck, running multiple backups at the same time would make it even worse.

Ist das immer noch RAIDZ1? Was bekommst du denn auf PVE direkt raus, wenn du PVE benchmarkst? Sowas in die Richtung: fio --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --sync=1 --rw=write --bs=4K --numjobs=1 --iodepth=1 --runtime=60 --time_based --name seq_read --filename=/path to pool

Like others already said, by default it reads everything. The money quote line is this one: 107: 2026-02-28 21:00:07 INFO: scsi0: dirty-bitmap status: created new Since the VM is not running and/or you have the stop backup mode, it can't make use of the dirty-bitmap and has to read the whole...

Ohh, danke, das war mir nicht bewusst. Das auslesen und hashen der kompletten Disk. Habe ich eine 1TB disk und möchte ein inkrementelles Backup machen mit Windows Server Sicherung, TimeMachine oder ZFS send geschieht dies sehr schnell und ohne CPU Last. Wer das erwartet von PBS, wie der User...

Inkrementell würde ich PBS nicht bezeichnen. Jedenfalls nicht was die Leute traditionell verstehen unter inkrementell (VSS oder ZFS send). Ja, den hash mit einer lokalen hashtable zu vergleichen spart einiges an Übertragung, aber wenn die VM einen reboot hatte (was bei Windows ja noch häufig...

Let's assume that you have an application that runs on a Linux VM. That application is mission critical to you and your business. Now you could setup the hypervisor and network and storage and so on to be HA, which in return makes your VM HA. If a node goes down, another node will take over the...

That is the money quote. But IMHO even more important, in many, many cases, making the server HA was the wrong approach to begin with. Making the application itself HA would be way cheaper, offer way better performance, less complex, and easier for maintenance.

No worries. IMHO the IT world is complicated enough. So I like to keep stuff K.I.S.S. In your situation I would either A: change RAIDZ to a 3 way mirror, get another TrueNAS system with HDDs as ZFS storage system and put files on NFS/SMB shares from there. B: Add a few HDDs to your Proxmox...

Let me try a different way. Imagine how you write stuff. You have 16k volblockstorage. So proxmox offers 16k blocks to the VM. Now your VM fills one such block. We assume that the data is totally incompressible, wo we really have to write 16k. How would that look from a storage perspective...

Take this with a huge grain of salt. I don't know you or your customers :) IMHO you probably don't need HA. Redudant PSU and local storage is more than enough. And your next part is a good explanation why. That is not automatically real HA. That is what I often see in SMBs and call "Sure this...

I gave you one possible answer, but you choose to ignore it. As a funny coincidence you answered one of my questions by posting this picture; your volblocksize is 16k. So my theory was right. So again, every 1TB VM disk will not only use 1TB but roughly 1.4TB. To prevent this you have...

Das ist ein ziemlicher edge case, der sich mit PBS nicht umsetzten lässt. PBS kann keine traditionell inkrementellen Backups. Wenn du es also 1:1 wie bei Veeam umsetzten möchtest, wirst vermutlich scheitern. Wenn du offen bist das System zu überdenken, ist lösbar. Das ist die sauberste Lösung...

You would have to provide a lot more information than what you posted here. Otherwise we have to make educated guesses ;) So just cluster, no HA? So you use ZFS and VMs use local RAW drives on ZFS? There are a few problems with that. Short: A: Don't use RAIDZ for VM! Use mirror instead. B...

https://pbs.proxmox.com/docs-2/user-management.html

It depends. Windows uses the User / share permission and uses a more restrictive AND permission logic. But for Users and groups, it uses the less restrictive OR permission logic. And Synology does this stuff again differently by using the more restrictive AND permission logic "your user might...

of course, why should it not? no need to censor rfc1918 :) Looks like a permission error. Take a look at this: https://pbs.proxmox.com/docs/ Now what tripped me up the first time setting it up, was this paragraph here: Permissions for API tokens are always limited to those of the user. So...

You don't have to, but I would highly recommend it. Also make sure it is offsite in case of a fire.