Search results

I have the same messages since I upgraded from 5 to 6. I don't know if it's related, but now snapshoting some of the CT freezes, making the CT unresponsive all night (until I just kill -9 the snapshot process).

yes the target is supposed to have 2T more free... I'm assuming there's a background copy process I missed somehow... I created the replication task in the GUI so I guess it's been automatically queued and my manual run is interfering... what's really weird is that I ran manually because the GUI...

Hello, is this still considered as good practice? I mean manually removing lines from a file inside /etc/pve ? Thanks

It's weird! now a 1.36T zfs fs exists on the target ?!?

Thanks for your answer. Here are the info: VM config: arch: amd64 cores: 1 hostname: xxxxx memory: 1000 net0: name=eth1,bridge=vmbr1,hwaddr=xxxx,ip=xxxxx,type=veth net1: name=eth0,bridge=vmbr0,gw=xxxxx,hwaddr=xxxxx,ip=xxxx,type=veth net2...

Greetings I'm trying to have a replication job between two nodes of a cluster, like this: pvesr run -id 111-2 -verbose After transfering 173G, the process stops with "cannot receive incremental stream: out of space". The free space on the receiving end is 1.65T. What am I doing wrong? Thanks...

As further testing, I moved the problematic VM to another node, and it's working. So it's very likely a host-related issue. Any idea??

Interesting follow-up. I moved a working VM to the host where the problem occured, and the VM is running erratically. So it's probably a host-related problem. Both hosts are running PVE 5.4-15, the working is Intel Xeon E3-1245v2@3,4GHz, the problematic is Intel Xeon E5-1650 v2 @3.5 GHz...

Host: CPU(s) 12 x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-1650 v2 @ 3.50GHz (1 Socket) Kernel Version Linux 4.15.18-12-pve #1 SMP PVE 4.15.18-35 (Wed, 13 Mar 2019 08:24:42 +0100) PVE Manager Version pve-manager/5.4-15/d0ec33c6 Guest Debian GNU/Linux 9 (stretch) # free -m total used...

My personal opinion is that it's not at all a technical issue: SoYouStart is the "low cost" offer and I suspect OVH wants us to migrate to a more expensive offer, even if the physical machine are the same. The tech support told me that Proxmox 6 is already available in OVH but not in SYS.

Greetings I'm puzzled by this: Proxmox reports that my CT has a memory usage of 0.08% (1.57 MiB of 1.95 GiB), however the guest system sees things differently: total used free shared buff/cache available Mem: 1000 664 4...

Do you have a procedure document to help me understand how I can do that?

Yes I had a similar answer: "hardware compatibility problem" which kind of worried me because it felt like they don't know what they are talking about. But yesterday I had a slightly different answer: "you can select a premium OVH offer", so I wonder if they are using this as an excuse to make...

Well it wasn't the cause... I know have 2T free disk, the VM is using 1G of 3G allowed, server load is between 0 and 4 (for 12 cores) and I see this kind of things: Jun 1 17:18:24 dkr06 kernel: [10071.847256] clear_huge_page+0x110/0x200 Jun 1 17:19:43 dkr06 kernel: [10150.892113]...

It seems you were right: I casually let the zfs partition go behind 80% and it was probably the root cause. After a lot of cleanup, things seems to be back to normal. Thanks a lot!!

Only the weird CPU/irq message I posted. I'm trying to free a lot of space to test if space is the problem, I know ZFS deals poorly with low disk space.

Thanks for your answers! Hum I've never tested that :) sounds fun! Would it help me preparing my cluster update to v6? So I would copy the current hosts as "guest hypervisors" on one of the current actual nodes?

So would it be safer to first add the new node as v5 and then upgrade everything? I have a 3 nodes cluster in production and I can't afford a mirror testbed

Oh I see, I mis-understood that it was possible. I'll try to update the cluster then, it's more work but make more sense than creating a new v5 node. thanks.

Greetings I'm trying to add a new node to my cluster. I followed the documentation to update all the current nodes to the latest v5 and corosync v3. It's mostly working: - current nodes see each other - on the GUI of one node I can control the other nodes - in Datacenter/Cluster, I see the node...