Search results for query: affinity

...with some practical guidance: Make sure you are using an iothread. Try aio=native. If your system has 2 physical CPUs, consider using CPU affinity to bind processing to a single CPU package. Preferably the one with the closest NUMA proximity to the network device. If you’re interested...

Would the node affinity rules defined here: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/High_Availability with "strict" set to 1 not suffice?

I've Forgotten the VM config : affinity: 16,17,40,41 bios: seabios boot: order=ide0;scsi0;scsi1;scsi2;scsi3;scsi4 cores: 1 cpu: x86-64-v2-AES ide0: none,media=cdrom memory: 16384 meta: creation-qemu=10.0.2,ctime=1758629387 name: cortexte2 net0: virtio=00:50:56:bd:00:0d,bridge=dc numa: 0 ostype...

...The reason was primarily to aggregate those relationships in a single view, allow further extensions and make the interactions between node affinity and resource affinity rules more visible. However, I can see the pain points described here and we're keen to improve the user experience...

...rises - On RouterOS VM: `tx_drops` on virtio interface - Only affects RouterOS VMs on the same bridge Question: - Is this likely a Proxmox/virtio/bridge issue, or something specific to RouterOS CHR? - Any tuning recommendations (vhost, offloading, IRQ affinity, bridge settings, etc.)? Thanks!

Was able to perform bisecting tests with CPU Affinity and determined that it is an issue with hyper threading on a specific core, in a specific CPU. thanks for your help and suggestions.

Hi, you can create a node affinity rule where you can select priorities just like for groups before. But you need to define your HA resources first (in the HA overview, there is an Add button for resources) and then you can select them for the rule. See also...

I installed the new version 9 directly and then did everything from the beginning again. Now the "resources" field of the HA node affinity does not show any HA resources.

...you upgraded the Proxmox VE host from version 8 to 9 or is it a new install? Either way, HA groups have been deprecated in favor of HA node affinity rules and these are feature-compatible, even though they are presented slightly different. This includes that the "nofailback" flag is now...

I would like to use HA in version 9, but I noticed that in the HA item there is no longer the group item, but affinity rules, when I press add HA node affinity it does not allow me to select anything in the HA resoucers item, and I can't proceed, how do I select this item? I can't find any...

...b pve would just move it back to node E because thats where it thought was best. Now if I have a cluster of 3 nodes for instance, and an affinity group with node a b and c all at priority 1 then nothing happens even if all vms are on node a (cant really test this scenario while vms are off or...

Fair point. It might be sensible to allow choosing a rule name (possible via API, but not UI) and to allow selecting which rule(s) a VM should belong to upon creation. Feel free to open a feature request for these: https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/ For now, you can put a name into the comment field...

...goes into is still way more steps than before. In the VM > more > manage HA theres no longer an option to associate the vm with a group (or affinity rule in this case) so you now need to go into datacenter after adding the vm as an HA resource, go to affinity rules, and open all of the...

...but it is focused on the dynamic load balancing of HA resources first, i.e., the storage must be shared across the cluster nodes (or HA node affinity rules must be setup to ensure that a HA resource cannot be placed on a node that doesn't have access to that storage). There are plans to allow...

Hi, you don't need to manually make rules for each VM. Just make one node affinity rule with the same node priorities you had for the HA group previously and then add all VMs that should follow those priorities to that single rule.

...with ha rules or as an option to replace them. We have so many vms and so many different combos of node types that manually making affinity rules for each vm ruins the HA ease. it would be so much better to include ha rules with node affinity but be able to configure that on a group and throw...

...cat /etc/modprobe.d/vfio.conf options vfio-pci ids=10de:2484,10de:228b disable_vga=1 root@pve:~# cat /etc/pve/qemu-server/107.conf affinity: 4-7,12-15 args: -cpu 'host,+kvm_pv_unhalt,+kvm_pv_eoi,hv_vendor_id=NV43FIX,kvm=off' bios: ovmf boot: order=scsi0;ide2;ide0;net0 cores: 8 cpu...

Affinity rules in the HA manager are supported since PVE 9: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Roadmap#Proxmox_VE_9.0 The respective docs can be found here https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/chapter-ha-manager.html#ha_manager_rules

@spirit any update on affinity /anti-affinity availability ?

...current state an i observed the Application Server VM migrated back to the source node and the Database VM is now migrating back too. From may point of view, HA manager should not (in any case) consider affinity rules for VMs of an affinity rule group as long as one of them is in migration...