Search results

IMHO all are misuses of an unprivileged LXC: it exists to isolate the LXC from the host as much a possible and that's why it is hard to "un-isolate" the LXC from the host. As simple as that. In this very case of a PBS, an unprivileged LXC adds nothing but headaches (but you already noticed...

Try to get PBS in a completely different machine to ease the recovery when the PVE host(s) fail, at least the one on the "main" site. That would also completely workaround the permissions issue. Remember that you can also use a Virtual Machine and use USB or full disk pass through to get the VM...

It's impossible to give accurate instructions/recommendations without accurate questions/configurations. Please, post the exact config of the hosts regarding disk/storage so we can help you out instead of pulling a crystal ball to guess your settings :)

IIUC, you have one host with some big pool were you host your fileserver VM. Let's call this pool "filepool" and shows as storage "filepool" in PVE, restricted to the one host that runs the fileserver VM. You would just need to add disk(s) to another host, configure a ZFS with pool name...

IMHO, using an unprivileged LXC for PBS doesn't make sense. The isolation that provides an unprivileged container is of no use in this use case. I mean, I don't expect PBS processes to misbehave or become malware that may try to get out the LXC via the host's kernel and try to break havoc in the...

This effectively renders the cluster useless: once you lose any OSD, there will be no I/O on the PGs stored in that OSD until they get recovered from the single copy still in the cluster. You should always use at least size=3, min_size=2 unless you can tolerate such downtime. Not to mention the...

AFAIK, there's no way to do that in a sensible way. The main reason for it is that all namespaces in the same datastore share the same set of chunks. That means that data is deduplicated among all namespaces of a datastore. If there was a way to set quotas to a namespace, which one would you...

Is this expected to be released with PVE9? Need to implement a solution for a use case were backup selection using tag would fit perfectly. Thanks!

If you install qemu-guest-agent on the VM the backup should be as consistent as with stop mode, unless you have some strange application there. Using two namespaces will require PVE to use two PBS storage, thus losing dirty bitmap when doing backups to the other, although the stop mode backup...

Given what's mentioned a few posts above [1], it could be released with PVE9 that will be based on Debian Trixie. Given that Trixie has not reached full freeze yet [2] but expecting that may happen soon, we could expect a PVE9 release around Q3 this year (it think I've seen some info posted by...

If you just want NFS, then maybe for some use cases multipath is better. If you want to cover other use usages, like normal VM traffic, were multipath doesn't apply/exists, bonding is an easy way to aggregate links.

Create a bonding at the PVE level using two physical nics. Then add a bridge over that bond. Your host will deal with load balancing and redundancy of the network connection. Which bonding mode to use depends on the switches and their features (i.e. you need stacking or MLAG to use LACP 802.3ad...

Unrelated to the CPU usage, which is indeed caused by proxmox-backup-api serving PVE storage status requests plus your little CPU, just a heads up: using RAID6 on BTRFS isn't a good idea as it is not stable [1] and even a badly timed power outage can corrupt metadata and make you lose data. [1]...

That same post, at the third comment, has a link to Proxmox bugzilla were they are discussing the matter... [1] [1] https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=6350

AFAIK it's in the works, as a forum search shows [1] [1] https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/feature-request-proxmox-9-0-iothread-vq-mapping.166919/

If you want to hide such messages, disable PCIe Advanced Error Reporting (PCIe AER) in your BIOS. Whatever hardware causes them will still cause them, but you won't see them in your logs. The downside is that uncorrectable errors, the bad ones, won't show up in your logs either... If you really...

That makes no sense: 2 drives are the perfect RAID1 setup to install any OS. That would be the first mobo/controller in history that doesn't allow a RAID1 with two drives :)

This doesn't feel logical IMHO. If you will end up starting the VM again in any of your surviving hosts, it will eventually use the same amount of memory it had before the shutdown, risking OOM killer on the host it is running in. Maybe a simpler option could be to use memory ballooning for that...

TLDR mon_osd_min_in_ratio is your friend [1] Long story By default it is 0.75, meaning that Ceph will not mark out a down OSD if there is already ~25% of OSD already marked out. That is, a minimum of 75% of OSD will remain in even if they are down hence no recovery will happen. In your...

Just a note: that option is exposed in the webUI at least since March 2023 with the release of PVE7.4 (check release notes [1]): [1] https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Roadmap#Proxmox_VE_7.4