Search results

Please ignore threads to which you have no constructive contribution :-) We like a civil tone in the forum, and no answer is better than a condescending one.

There is a reason why you don't see that in the admin guide. Most of it is not possible directly on Proxmox VE. For points 1-4: You could probably achieve this if you use an external service to sync users against. For example, LDAP or likely even better: OIDC where the OIDC service is actively...

The guest needs to do a clean restart or a live migration to another node to switch to KRBD.

Ah okay. As you can imagine, since December there is quite a bit going on, and it might take a bit until your email will be processed.

okay, quite as expected. We have the following rule documented: rule replicate_3rooms { id {RULE ID} type replicated step take default step choose firstn 0 type room step chooseleaf firstn 1 type host step emit } The bucket type itself does not matter. The main...

If you share the CRUSH rule you use (node->Ceph->Configuration, right side is the CRUSH map and the rules are at the bottom), we can see what is actually happening. Right now, with the information available (blacking out bucket names and hostnames will make it harder), it looks like you have...

Since our products are freely available, licensed under the AGPLv3, there are no barriers to access them and build a course. If you have more ideas or requests, feel free to contact us at office@proxmox.com. The forum isn't necessarily the best place :)

ja, entweder per CLI oder in der Web UI einfach in das Feld den Namen der neuen Class schreiben. Sobald es mindestens eine OSD mit der Class gibt, kannst du eine entsprechende Regel erstellen. Allerdings ist die Frage, ob so eine Separierung was bringt. Wahrscheinlich nur, wenn die...

Was willst du erreichen? Die initiale replicated_rule macht keine Unterscheidung auf die Device Class der OSDs und verteilt die Daten über alle OSDs. Wenn du eine Device-Class spezifische Regel erstellst, so wie deine aussieht, dann werden die Pools, denen diese Regel zugewiesen ist, nur noch...

Was this node/cluster set up cleanly through the Web UI or pveceph install? Is it initialized? E.g. the first configuration step has been done in the Web UI or pveceph init has been run with the necessary parameters? Because if, then these files that are apparatently missing, should all be there.

With 8.1 that was made possible to some degree, from the Roadmap:

Maybe as a more general explanation: whatever you have in Datacenter -> Storage (/etc/pve/storage.cfg) are the storages Proxmox VE knows about. They don't have a direct result on the actual storage layer, but rather make sure the nodes can connect to that said storage. As @spirit mentioned...

Good that we talked about that, as it seems, I got it a bit wrong how it works in detail.

If it is for the same guests why not one backup target and a more finely grained retention configuration? See https://pbs.proxmox.com/docs/prune-simulator/index.html to simulate how many backups will be kept. 12 Dailies and 6 Monthly for example?

do you have another prune setting configured somewhere? They can be configured per backup job or globally per storage. If you configure it in both places, the more aggressive one wins. If you use the Proxmox Backup Server, you can additionally define prune settings there as well ;-)

hehe, powering down / pulling network cables would be one way to see how the output changes ;) as you can see in my example output, it would expect 6 votes, but currently only has 5, and it lists only 5 members

The last 2 parts of pvecm status should contain this info? Votequorum information ---------------------- Expected votes: 6 Highest expected: 6 Total votes: 5 Quorum: 4 Flags: Quorate Membership information ---------------------- Nodeid Votes Name...

The Proxmox Plugin from Zabbix is nice to get stats for the guest and so on. For the host itself, the Linux host template for the agent (installed on Proxmox VE) works well.

Do you plan to use both ports for different things or for redunancy/performance? If it is the former, why not create a new vmbrX interface that uses the second NIC as bridge port?

Ideally you can set up some bonding, also known as nic teaming, link aggregation. There are quite some options available. Which one works best depends on the other side that you connect to. The simplest "active-backup" one will always work, as it will use the primary NIC if available, and then...