Search results

Hi, can you try using Q35 machine type recent/latest version instead of "downgraded" V9.2 version? Maybe that helps.

iscsiadm discovery against mgmt IP did not work, I will try opening a proper case with Dell, would be better to fix it from the right end I suppose. Will keep you posted.

difference between the nodes is, that the failing node got the update to latest PVE kernel and the other didn't so far. Apart from that I wanted to try, if the advertising from Dell-storage end is working properly if I use the management-IP of the controllers rather than iscsi-Port-IPs as...

Hey @bbgeek17, this is indeed a good starting point, do you know if I can safely replace portal IP in /etc/pve/storage.cfg with another one via CLI and just reboot, to see if it is working? Or do I have to do this in a different place. Cluster is non productive yet, but I don't want to...

I know, there are 8 ports on our storage, 4 of them can be connected (10.xxx.19.yyy IP-Range), the other 4 ports (10.aaa.20.bbb) are for intra-storage replication, nevertheless the appliance announces all 8 corresponding IP-addresses for 8 portals instead of 4. This might be bad implementation...

Hi Victor, restore on Hyper-V is working for me in general, but I don't have and ESXi for testing. Do you have subscription with Veeam? Their support is quite good. Regards, Andreas

Hi Fiona, those two are reasonably small and secret, how can I share full logs without compromising internal information e.g. IP-addresses and servernames etc. in here?

That would work indeed, but as I said, it is just temporary one off solution for importing once. And I had those 4 TB drives spare anyway. :)

Hi all, I get open-iscsi-service failed to start on booting one of my nodes after upgrading to Proxmox 9.0.10 (6.14.11-3-pve) via GUI from 6.14.11-2-pve. Has anyone seen the same, just wanted to check before upgrading any of the other nodes and try finding the error. Thanks, Andreas

Hi, this is possible but we have about 140 chunky vm's to bulk-import, so I need something large :) I ended up sticking some local 4 TB drives in each node. Thank you all. Andreas

Hi @KeyzerSuze, also consult Storage: iSCSI from Proxmox manual. Using Volume-Chains, you can even use snapshotting with iscsi now. Remember to create one large LUN / or couple of large LUNs on iSCSI-Storage and create one large volume on each and only one volume group each rather then small...

Thanks a lot for pointing me in the right direction, so far I have been backing up to the existing (windows) backup repository. From your post I guess this is not working very well for file level restore if recommended at all. It looks like I have to create one/several dedicated linux backup...

Hello @Bu66as, I have created 4 Veeam Workers Type Proxmox VE, one for each node (qdevice is present, no worries). Can you please advice where I can prioritize those for Proxmox task? Do I manually have to select one via entering the IP here: Restore -> Guest File Restore -> Helper Host ->...

Hi, ext4 with Hardware-RAID10 is fine. Maybe someone else can jump in checking your issues, as I am not a DB guru in any way.

Hey hi, which filesystem did you choose? Did you choose ZFS or Cephs? Then you cannot use Hardware-Raid of your server but need to switch them to HBA-mode. Regards, Andreas

Quick update, this is still under investigation of Veeam support. With latest Veeam version an most recent Proxmox-plugin it tries to use a Microsoft Hyper-V-helper instead of using Linux-helper/worker (we are backing up Hyper-V-Cluster as well as Proxmox-HA-Cluster).

Good to know, no worries :)

Hey, are you using DHCP by any chance? This will load settings announced by DHCP-Server. Can you post /etc/network/interfaces please. Andreas.

Good morning all, Proxmox VE 9 is now officially supported on most recent Veeam with Proxmox VE plugin according to this KB article: Veeam KB4775 - Proxmox VE 9 plugin I have tried backup with latest VM version, which is working now. Download of single files (Copy To...) from backup is also...

Hi, not because underlying interfaces are changing but purely for transparency reasons - like attaching the name and number of corresponding LACP-trunks on the switch. I might be a little obsessed with documentation and labeling maybe though. :)