Search results

I have a few dozen servers running Proxmox and I occasionally get server lockups. I posted some of the kernel errors from the console on ServerFault and in two different incidents responders are blaming the kernel version that Proxmox runs on (including the latest versions of Proxmox)...

Re: Proxmox 2.0 not likely to have SSD support [SOLVED] Thanks for the feedback, nekatreven. I probably should have gone with the OCZ... it even costs less than the Samsung. I think I steered away from it because the Samsung I got had better reviews on newegg...

Re: Proxmox 2.0 not likely to have SSD support [SOLVED] I would be interested in knowing what SSD drive you are using. My testing with the Samsung 470 did show a slow down after I hammered that drive. I'm not sure how any SSD drive would get around this problem without using either TRIM or...

Re: Proxmox 2.0 not likely to have SSD support [SOLVED] I had heard the same thing about wiper.sh... that it only works with ext3 if you unmount it first. Because of that, I installed the SSD as a secondary drive so that I could format it ext4. I then edited /etc/fstab and pointed...

Thanks for the tip... htop looks pretty cool. Curtis

Oops... I get a Segmentation fault when I try to run that. I suppose that's because of the kernel I'm running? # uname -a Linux cxrt18 2.6.32-4-pve #1 SMP Fri Nov 26 06:42:28 CET 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux Oh... I see...

I guess I should have mentioned that I did try the obvious things such as ps and top... but, like I said, I didn't find any processes that were using a significant amount of ram... nor did I see any processes that were not running on the other containers that are using less than 300MBs of ram...

I just noticed that a few of my OpenVZ containers show memory usage of around 1.6GBs of ram (on the Proxmox virtual machines display). I wouldn't think much of it, but one of the containers in question is clone of containers that normally use less than 300MBs, and this clone isn't running...

Thanks for the idea, however, there are no backup jobs defined... Curtis

On one of my servers, all OpenVZ containers seem to lose access to /dev/simfs for a few minutes each day between 5:00am and 5:10am. Or, at least that's what appears to be happening... scripts that are running during that time report issues with reading files. My first thought was to look for a...

I know this reply is a bit late (things got busy for me for a while), but thanks for posting your benchmarks, Udo! It's good to know that performance suffered a little bit with TRIM enabled (I was wondering if that might be the case). So, there might actually be an advantage to using the...

Re: Proxmox 2.0 not likely to have SSD support [SOLVED] Yes, I agree that it is not elegant as the automatic TRIM (discard) support found in ext4 (and actually ext4 isn't enough... you also need kernel support), but my tests do show that it works. The problem I was trying to resolve was...

Good news... I think I found a work around to support SSD under Proxmox... http://forum.proxmox.com/threads/6606-Proxmox-2.0-not-likely-to-have-SSD-support?p=38029#post38029

Re: Proxmox 2.0 not likely to have SSD support [SOLVED] How to update the thread title with a [SOLVED] tag?

Re: Proxmox 2.0 not likely to have SSD support [SOLVED] Good news. I found a workaround that I've tested under Proxmox 1.8 with a Samsung 470 series drive. The wiper.sh utility that comes with hdparm effectively does the same thing as the automatic TRIM (aka "discard") feature built into...

Your "isn't KVM faster than OpenVZ" statement still has me curious... in what cases have you found KVM to be faster than OpenVZ?

I'm assuming the Samsung you tested was one of their earlier offerings and not their newer 470 series? The 470 series has great reviews, which is why I ended up going with it. Side note... the Intel drives also support TRIM, which is what led me to believe that they suffer from the same...

Not that I'm aware. KVM, like all full virtualization technologies, requires a hypervisor layer, and therefore has additional overhead that isn't required with OpenVZ. OpenVZ, on the other hand, is more of a glorified chroot, and so you're running pretty much on bare metal. The main trade...

Nope. The kernel version on my Debian Wheezy install is 2.6.39-2. My only interest (so far) with Proxmox had been OpenVZ, but your post just made me realize that perhaps I should consider giving the 2.6.35 kernel with KVM a try. Since these boxes will only be running a single VM, I suppose...

Udo, that is very kind of you to consider doing some benchmarks. I wasn't suggesting that you do that. I was just hoping that you were going to tell me that you had found a particular brand that performed well without the TRIM command, and that you had found some published benchmarks that back...