Search results

That's great, BUT, I would like to either: 1. see the original poster comeback and state whenever they achived the original speed 2. see some rudimentary test results of BSD in VM using VIRTIO for both interfaces, under normal routing load.

wait, he was running those of the bridges, does it mean that he's got a line throughput on vmbr ?

any progress on that ? I was considering doing a failover dual router on proxmox and I'm trying to figure out whenever those machines will need extra nics (not needing those would be beneficial !)

FYI, I'm not encouraging to unsubscribe from enterprise repo (just in case admins will misconstrue it). All the machines that I've had contact with with enterprise subscription have intel cards, and only small test (fun) clusters have realtek cards - hence I can't at this point confirm relevance...

Actually, I've started an issue on LXC github to see what they've got. @wbumiller you might be interested in the reply that I've got there: https://github.com/lxc/lxcfs/issues/616#issuecomment-1759878400 in essence: Edit: which I think could be implemented relatively easily, while still...

Thanks for that bud !

since 8.0 it's running OK ... so far for me.

No probs. I myself always skip "medium" articles in search results as it has a lot of buzz words trying to rank it higher in results and rarely has solution to real OS problems ... then I've seen it somewhere somebody pointing to it, and I realised I'm an idiot ... again :D

Thanks for clarification ! (and I was afraid you'll confirm it :( ) About setting the core count to "0" - GUI doesn't even allow this. Is that a "supported" feature, or something that works from config level just because it was overlooked and in near future it could break all my CT ? Also for...

Hi, I was researching intel P&E arch issues & config with proxmox, and there was a statement (at least for PVE7) that on startup, container cores are allocated and can't be switched over during operation if for example higher load is required. here at 6:43 So my questions are: 1. is that true...

☝️ namely: EDID block 0 is all zeroes just eating 100% of one core and floding the syslog. It’s an old issue that rears it’s head from time to time on headless and some ipmi chips (for me an old supermicro mobo)

Hi, If after an upgrade from 7 to 8, or a fresh install of your interface seem to die randomly (minutes to hours), and only indication you see in your syslog is: NETDEV WATCHDOG: enp1s0 (r8169): transmit queue 0 timed out possibly you've got a Realtek network interface that seem to be affected...

Nope, didn't ask about default target link, however I thought that I will report it.

To admin: if I'm wrong here, please delete this thread. Hi just a slight request, can somebody add in 7to8 documentation: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Upgrade_from_7_to_8 that after upgrade the default target may need changing back to multiuser ? All of my nodes on upgrade changed to graphical...

bump ? Any additional logs I can search for and provide in this case ? Asking before those will get rotated out.

I've removed the description section since includes some sensitive information. $ pct config 113 --current arch: amd64 cores: 4 features: nesting=1 hostname: data-logger memory: 4096 net0: name=eth0,bridge=vmbr0,firewall=1,hwaddr=6A:7C:73:9E:7A:F2,ip=dhcp,type=veth onboot: 1 ostype: ubuntu...

So this seems to happen after a backup. For some reason backup fails, and finishes with "unexpected status" INFO: Starting Backup of VM 113 (lxc) INFO: Backup started at 2023-07-11 06:00:14 INFO: status = running INFO: CT Name: data-logger INFO: including mount point rootfs ('/') in backup...

Hi, I'm getting similar issue, however in happens from time to time on same container. Container is NOT really funky, has no special options, it's unprivileged. Any advise on how I could diagnose why this specific container get's locked for no reason ?

Better and continuously maintained documentation. Continuous automated testing. Also you make it sound like somebody is suggesting implementing orbital guidance. Is that's why vm vs ct shutdown varies greatly in reliability in web gui vs cli ? is that why some have scripts walking the nodes...

That workaround is really suboptimal since fast storage nodes will be slow down by a slowest nodes in cluster. Why I would slow down backups to 50MBps if some nodes hapille can handle 4GBps ? and still have the slow nodes suffer.