Search results

Ooh, consumer crucial, not good, not good.

But for now bcachefs works great with 6.17 kernel

Why are you putting those two nodes in the same cluster as those before? Why not just for starters, create them in separate clusters and work with that?

Why you have external help? When External Audit comes(Grant Thornton,KPMG etc etc) first they ask you is "what if you get hit by a bus", who will support that and that. That is why you need to have external maintenance contracts.

Ceph-replication,zfs-replication. Or just backup copying onto DRS site. What is RTO/RPO?

You mention failover, and in that regard, it makes sense to use Proxmox <> Proxmox pve-zsync replication. Both proxmoxes have zfs storage for vm and cts and you implement it on one machine. Failove then has moving .conf files and starting the machines on replicated node.

What is the use case for using zfs and disks in this way? This is not recommended way, if i have only two disks this way i would use bcachefs.

You are literally speaking about snapshot replication, by zfs or any other FS. So just setup pve-zsync to another machine and it's done.

Storage vendors can support anything they want,because you pay them to support it. But if you open a ticket with mdadm corruption, will they fix it?

1. Yes it is because you don't have shared storage for all your nodes, which is usually ceph. 2. There are some aftermarket scripts to replicate whole pool, but you usually want to replicate different machines with different schedules, eg dbs in 1-5m, app servers in /15 min,etc etc. If you...

Yes,it is completely safe and usable.

How are you testing inside windows for performance, and your windows vm configuration, which cpu type is it?

https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/proxmox-9-1-5-breaks-lxc-mount-points.180161/

just add test repo,there is zfs 2.4

Even though I am in Europe not in EU, this is a great initiative. And I agree on Proxmox influence on virt services.

ZFS 2.4 is in test atm. And it is working good at >5 machines atm.

My recommendation is to use physical links to corosync, not vlan ones. As for the other things this is okay, all links should be active-passive in proxmox, so that you don't care if something dies ,and this is it. CEPH will work great in that case, those ssds work really great in practice.

Then okay, give them one disk(ceph) for os and one for VM and that is that. No raid inside and other bs.

All of this is okay, but how will you run ports passthrough?

Yes, vm-1-hypervisor. Strange but okay if he got money for it. Why not?