Search results

(ie: NOT SOLVED)

so then how to reduce impact?

Install 7.x and upgrade. However I think 7.x removed the HOLD-ALT-TO-HIGHLIGHT-KEY-TO-CHOOSE-BUTTON for keyboard only -- my servers dont have a lot of USB (which are user periferals..) - 2 USB slots: 1 for USB key and one for keyboard. Should be able to install with only keyboard! These are...

Even this on my ancient monitor is causing problems, likely because it's picking a 1280x900 or something mode. "Mode out of range". Thrashing about trying to figure an X-based solution here (or go to 7.x install and upgrade apparently?) EDIT: Solution - had a 6.2 usb key and little patience to...

Missing my point, it should be <14 then not <=13. :P

ongoing. oddly, it's <=12, which means '12.0' would qualify, but 12.1 and 12.2 wont. shouldnt it be <=12.9999 or just <13?

I am not sure if i should care that it's using 60% of a core on a 54 core/ht box, but it still seems egregious. I can try to tune it but Im nervous Ill cause it to explode with even worse usage or otherwise hobble the box (which has a few vms and lots of ct's) I have 256GB ram, and while the...

The problem is that debian 10 and even 11 include the deprecated ISRG X3 root key which has been expired - and a default certbot install will use that CA. (Or you have not generated legitimate keys and are using snakeoil.pem still). You need to install an updated certbot via install instrux on...

Better is to just put this all into the /etc/network/interfaces file: auto eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 192.168.55.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 192.168.55.1 scope link The scope link is retained by proxmox when it recreates the file - but I assume on...

Where to get and how to add the proxmox enterprise and no-sub gpg keys?

no answer from prox staff yet?

search the forums, already asked: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/apparmor-in-privileged-container.107989/

Course it does - you are flushing your caches away and increasing the reads from the disks dramatically. Much slower than reading from cache - response times will be slower, and in fact, you could run into head thrash on the disk reading and writing a whole lot at the same time, etc. Your system...

Updating the kernel as we did so long ago probably wont fix it since things have moved far forward in 4 years. You have another issue. You need to find a new related thread, or start a new one, as it's unrelated to this specific issue at that time.

interesting. Dont think I've had that problem, so far every time it's been tmpfs with journald. tmpfs ram shows up as 'buffers' for some reason (since its disk related i guess? though flushing buffers of course wont solve it! thus I feel it's misreported in the wrong column and sent me goose...

Check your tmpfs usage, its charged to ram for the container. My culprit was systemd-journald, had to put in a crontab to vacuum the logs out.

According to https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/proxmox-5-1-pty-allocation-request-failed-on-channel-0.43460/ you must remove fstab entries regarding /dev/pts (and probably others, like tmpfs) from vz containers to convert to lxc under newer proxmox, or you wont get pty's and you will get this...

Ive seen other posts around the internet about people hunting for the culprit and finding memory leaks in various apps. If it's not your tmpfs (and there are other tmpfs users other than systemd-journald, note), then it's something else. Keep looking.

This misleading issue is reporting it as buffers/cache instead of in "used". If you google it, there are dozens of posts by others misled by this and trying to flush their caches, which will not help at all. "Used" would be a fairer category to put it in, but Im guessing because of the way...

That said, is there a way to restrict tmpfs size in a container directly? Sane defaults of half the operating ram unless overridden would be nice.