Search results

For the replication of storage I’d look at linstor, basically drbd with a proxmox plugin.

Of both are of equal quality, yes, I’d do the same.

You could download the 7.3 ISO and install that. Maybe then you can upgrade the individual packages to the desired version, sounds better to me, not sure if it'll work though.

Will you require HA? If not… always go for zfs (plus replication if you have the space). If not.. ceoh, but with a network upgrade.

Hm, quiet in this thread. Can anyone advise me on cpu/mem and the sata vs nvme question? I’ll happily buy nvme, but it would be a waste not to use this 70 TB of fine ssd’s.

+1 on hold version option

Backups will work with PBS. Snapshots on LVM are technically possible, performance goes down so much, you don't want that.

Yeah, agreed. But any other filesystem would have the same issue, but yes, I do prefer to keep it on if performance allows it. ZFS is the best for a reason.

Hi all, We're currently thinking about moving one cluster to proxmox. Storage used will be about 130 TB. I read about and tested PBS, works like a charm. But not on spinning rust. First question: what compression / dedup rate can I realisticly expect? The 130 TB storage in use are 90% Ubuntu...

I bet you @pille99 is testing on a RAM drive. And a fast one at that :)

Sorry, can't help you there, never tested it with one cable/switchport offline. I didn't get a single packet before the firmware upgrade, nothing in tcpdump even.

Just looked it up, iterally had the same thing, but with active/backup bond mode. These were Intel 10 gbit fiber nic’s on ubuntu 1804 back in the day. No network in the vm layer possible until firmware upgrade.

Had something similar in the past, fix for me was to update firmware on the nic’s.

Yeah, not 10 miljoen QD1 random IOPS :)

Hm, never did GPU passthrough, so this may make no sense.. but did you check power saving settings on hardware this is running on?

Wrong forum, see https://forum.proxmox.com/forums/proxmox-ve-installation-and-configuration.16/

Yeah, sounds like cache. For fio you can use rampup parameter to circumvent cache. For the 30% performance degredation.. don’t know if that’s normal, sounds like a lot to me.

For starters... better to use fio to benchmark instead of a VERY short hdparm test. Never used hdparm for benchmarking before, but good chance you're reading from cache :)

Dis the NAS get a different DHCP IP at install time then it has now?

Thanks for the replies! One thing I do wonder is how the compression performs in a real life scenario and what the compression gains are. Reason for asking: currently we have a storage solution that supports trim and thus we have only 65% of allocated storage in use in the storage system. I...