Search results

Thanks for sharing. With the issues i ran into above (see previous page), I thought it was related to how disks were passed through to the vm. Yours seems more like a case where the cifs client (nfs too likely) is broken somehow in 9.x in certain scenarios.

What is your storage config like? Nas running in a vm? Disks in pass through?

Some more data points. b550/3700x NFS exports defined in a truenas vm NFS client was the pve host itself "cat /dev/random > filename.ext" in the exported folder to geneate nfs load Monitoring tn pool status with "zpool iostat 1" in the tn vm Installed prox 8.2 from scratch and retested.. same...

Tested same scenario on a z690/12700k platform. No lockups or crashes with nfs. The only consistent thing about all this is the inconsistency. Previous platform was a b550/3700x. This really does seem to be a case of ymmv type situation.

Following @cosmos255 suggestion above, I retested 9.1 w/kern 6.17 with disk directly attached to TN using sas hba in pass through. To clarify, truenas resides as a vm under proxmox. Additional virtual disk (stored on local-lvm created during proxmox install) defined in TN as the zfs vdev. NFS...

Thanks for replying. So it appears you're passing through a nvme drive? Did you use this to pass through the disk before - https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Passthrough_Physical_Disk_to_Virtual_Machine_(VM) ? What's interesting, in my testing (post #46), I'm not even passing through a whole disk...

Can you clarify what exactly you mean? Are you passing a sata or nvme device? How were you passing it through before?

This thread prompted me to do some testing before upgrading the production box. On a test server, installed pve 8.2 (what i'm running on the prod box), then restored various pve and other config files (think full recovery). Once at a satisfactory state, updated to pve 8.4, then to pve 9.1...

I have a spare unused box consisting of a z690 board and 12700K cpu. Installed using the same iso/external flash drive as on the z97 board. Not sata/ata errors during install. After updated from 6.17.2 to 6.17.4-2 kernel, rebooted. Still no issues. As for the z97 board, tried a few other...

Even with kernel 6.14?

Reading the forum more, it seems to be affecting newer platforms as well. Issue appears to be introduced with 6.17.4-1 series. 6.17.2-xxx is good (post 10 of this thread)? That was not the case in my case (z97 board). The pve 9.1 iso includes 6.17.2-1-pve. I had to revert to latest 6.14.11-4...

I don't think this is samsung related. More likely related to the z97 board. I ran into similar issue tonight installing 9.1 to a gigabyte z97n board when using onboard sata as the ssd target. Lots of write errors along the way. I tried with both a samsung evo 850 drive and a seagate 2tb...

Both *senses now directly support vlan0, no need for netgraph, just reference the interface directly. Your hypervisor must pass through eapol (888e) traffic if you're not passing the nic through directly.

Thanks for following up. Looks like there's no good path forward other than starting over. I suppose running pve-backup-client from a bootable disk but using folder level backup (such as /), is the next best thing. Restoring would be a manual process, involving reinstalling packages and...

Thank you for clarifying. Just trying to wrap my head around how best to backup the server (single, no clusters). During install, i selected the ext4 option which created a 96GB LV (root) and 783GB LV (data) on the 931GB (1TB) ssd. The latter of which is used for vm storage. If I'm...

@Dunuin Your script above, does it still end up reading the entire LVM partition (part3), including the unused space when sending it to PBS? Same for restore?

@MarcelOnPXMX My solution was to not use PMG. I'm sure it's possible to configure it with the desired results, but it's beyond my ability.

Using the lxc.mount.entry method in unpriveldged containers, do you still need to do the gui/uid remapping? Here's a snippet of my container.conf. IIRC, i needed to pass gui/uid of 864 and 865 to get permissions to work correctly. mp0: /mnt/pve/nas1-scratch,mp=/mnt/scratch mp1...

^^Ran into this myself ( finger print change). To deal with the fqdn instead of the pbe ip, create a dns entry in your dns resolver. ie. pbe.domain.com > {internal ip of pbe server} pbe.domain.com > 192.168.1.250 Lets encrypt should continue to work as it's likely using dns validation with...

Sorry, no option to edit the op available.