Search results

Hello! As some of you may have heard, a huge security hole has been found in the Java package "log4j". (https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/new-zero-day-exploit-for-log4j-java-library-is-an-enterprise-nightmare/) So my question is, does Proxmox also use this package? Do we admins...

Ah. Alright! Thank you for the instructions. I'll try that. :)

So you do this manually via ssh? And then, when copied, the new cluster recognized the config and thus automatically adds the VM?

Hello! I just stumpled on this thread, because I have currently the same situation of transfering VMs between clusters. Is there any kind of prediction, when this feature may be included in a stable version? Or some kind of roadmap?

Just an update: Also tried to add: [client] rbd_cache = false [global] rbd_non_blocking_aio = false to the config file. VM still freezes.

Okay! Thanks for your help anyway! :)

Logfile is full of: 2021-06-11 14:37:05.515 7f25f228d700 1 mon.XX@2(peon).osd e584 _set_new_cache_sizes cache_size:1020054731 inc_alloc: 71303168 full_alloc: 75497472 kv_alloc: 868220928 2021-06-11 14:37:10.515 7f25f228d700 1 mon.XX@2(peon).osd e584 _set_new_cache_sizes cache_size:1020054731...

Repeated the same test on a second VM:

Yes I know... We currently run our "productive" VMs on a single iSCSI Server, which performs much better than CEPH at the moment (no problems at all regarding performance) Because the iSCSI Server is our bottleneck, we wanted to use CEPH now, so it's very disappointing to get that hangs etc.

The specialist just send me this table. Looks interesting regarding my problems / bad performance. So maybe it is the block size?

Yes thats true! That was also my thought. The problem is, that I don't know much about fio. The specialist told me, that I need to use --ioengine=rbd but the ceph cluster is not available inside the VM, so that doesn't make sense to me.. I mean the randwrite without --ioengine=rbd was also OK...

And fio, which I ran on a VM: fio --rw=randwrite --name=test --size=2G test: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T) 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync, iodepth=1 fio-3.16 clock setaffinity failed: Invalid argument Starting 1 process Jobs: 1 (f=1)...

Yes sure! Here are the results: rados bench -p testbench 10 write --no-cleanup hints = 1 Maintaining 16 concurrent writes of 4194304 bytes to objects of size 4194304 for up to 10 seconds or 0 objects Object prefix: benchmark_data_103380 sec Cur ops started finished avg MB/s cur MB/s last...

Yes, I have also heard about the autoscaler. I will ask the specialist again if it is really necessary. So the PGs are not it then.... :/ I do not remember to have set the block size. Could that also be a cause? I don't know if you have to pay attention to this under CEPH as well (?).

7.1TiB Raw space And due to the replicas there is about 2.4TiB space available for use currently in use is only 311GiB

Thank you very much for your reply :) Well the 32PGs were recommended / set by the specialist.. He said, when the autoscaler starts to complain about to few PGs, then I should increase it

Doesn't seem to fix the problem.. A VM froze again Has anyone an idea why this happens?

Well at the beginning I had entered the CEPH Mon IPs as below: 192.168.x.x,192.168.x.x,192.168.x.x I've read an article, where they recommended using ";" Now it seems to work better?! Can someone confirm this? I am completly confused ...

So we've done some performance testing on the cluster itself. It seems to work as "designed" So the problem is between proxmox and ceph..

I've already saw this post: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/krbd-and-external-ceph-slow-vm-disk-use-100.88684/ But this does not seem to be a solution for us.