Hi,
I'm doing some testing with a new proxmox server and decided to try out btrfs.
I installed proxmox with btrfs as the root filesystem.
This gave me a local storage called local-btrfs mapped to /var/lib/pve/local-btrfs
I have created a VM and converted it to a template. I then tried to resize (increase) that disk but I get the following error:
qemu-img: Could not open '/var/lib/pve/local-btrfs/images/6000/base-6000-disk-1/disk.raw': Could not open '/var/lib/pve/local-btrfs/images/6000/base-6000-disk-1/disk.raw': Read-only file system
TASK ERROR: command '/usr/bin/qemu-img resize -f raw /var/lib/pve/local-btrfs/images/6000/base-6000-disk-1/disk.raw 8589934592' failed: exit code 1
If I resize the disk before I convert the VM to a template with "qm template", it works fine.
It seems like with btrfs, the subvolume is marked read-only and that prevents the resize.
I have another proxmox server using ZFS storage and I'm able to resize the disks on template VM's without issue so this looks like it may be a bug specific to the usage of btrfs?
I'm doing some testing with a new proxmox server and decided to try out btrfs.
I installed proxmox with btrfs as the root filesystem.
This gave me a local storage called local-btrfs mapped to /var/lib/pve/local-btrfs
I have created a VM and converted it to a template. I then tried to resize (increase) that disk but I get the following error:
qemu-img: Could not open '/var/lib/pve/local-btrfs/images/6000/base-6000-disk-1/disk.raw': Could not open '/var/lib/pve/local-btrfs/images/6000/base-6000-disk-1/disk.raw': Read-only file system
TASK ERROR: command '/usr/bin/qemu-img resize -f raw /var/lib/pve/local-btrfs/images/6000/base-6000-disk-1/disk.raw 8589934592' failed: exit code 1
If I resize the disk before I convert the VM to a template with "qm template", it works fine.
It seems like with btrfs, the subvolume is marked read-only and that prevents the resize.
I have another proxmox server using ZFS storage and I'm able to resize the disks on template VM's without issue so this looks like it may be a bug specific to the usage of btrfs?