Search results

However, installing in a 32 GB partition is just fine, since you can do what you want with the remaining space, i.e. create a partition for said cases.

Then this might be a bug. :D

Don't think that it is broken since this area is responsive.

But keep in mind that for a firewall VM both host's and VM's firewalls in conjunction are relevant. Rules on vmbr0 and vmbr1 regulate traffic to and from the VM's interfaces but the host's/datacenter's firewall might also interfere with communication.

It's HP owned and probably not reachable from everywhere. https://whois.domaintools.com/16.0.0.1

Okay, although that might not be directly related to your problem, please remember that you shouldn't use globally routable addresses for a private network. RFC1918 defines three IP ranges for internal use and 16.0.0.0/24 is not included. Did you enable the firewall on vmbr0 or vmbr1?

10 Gbps is the lowest that you should go with Ceph. The higher, the better, so maybe you could think about 25 Gbps or even FC solutions, for the sake of low latency. Then, a lot of RAM and CPU cores since Ceph can be hungry. Ceph provides a hardware requirements document for such considerations...

Das wäre die Goldrandlösung, ja.

If the number of nodes isn't limited and you are concerned about performance, I would go for a separate setup of compute and storage nodes. Unfortunately, I'm not really experienced in the SAN environment. But there are also other cluster file systems around. I'm a Ceph fan but that doesn't mean...

What is the config of the pfSense VM?

If you would only have one storage afterwards, I would go for Ceph. Otherwise you can never reboot the storage without a downtime of everything. If you have a HA storage, I would go for iSCSI or NFS. Like in a real SAN.

Der Agent kann den Gast anweisen, einen konsistenten Zustand im Dateisystem herzustellen, damit für das Backup nur kurz das Dateisystem eingefroren werden kann. Ansonsten ist nicht sichergestellt, dass das Backup konsistent ist.

You cannot really have both. At least not in the best quality. Ceph is flexible but not exactly fast (although fast enough in my opinion). Local storage is fast but not very flexible. As soon as you have to reboot the storage, everything stands.

Ah yes, QNAP doesn't feature every standard Linux command. Glad, that it works!

Educate yourself in internet and server security and power off that postfix NOW!

What would be different if not? ;)

/etc/issue ist noch so ein Kandidat.

You can try qm unlock 100 first.

Did I get that correctly that you run Corosync over the same interface like the WebGUI and the VMs? Then you most probably already have found your culprit.

ssh admin@qnap -t "shutdown -hP now"