Proxmox Start/Shutdown order

[Ahmet Bas]

In Proxmox you can use VM -> Options -> Start/Shutdown order we you can configure the following values:

Start/Shutdown order:
Startup delay:
Shutdown timeout:

We have three VMs:

• VM 100
• VM 200
• VM 300

The shutdown should be done from VM 300, VM 200, and VM 100 and when it starts it should start from VM 100, VM 200, and VM 300. We have configured the following config:

VM 100

Start/Shutdown order: any
Startup delay: default
Shutdown timeout:120

VM 200

Start/Shutdown order: any
Startup delay: 60
Shutdown timeout:60

VM 300

Start/Shutdown order: any
Startup delay: 120
Shutdown timeout:0

When we start the VMs VM 100 gets started and before VM 200 is started VM 300 is started. How can we prevent VM 300 from getting started before VM 200? Is there a config error?

 

[Dunuin]

The shutdown should be done from VM 300, VM 200, and VM 100 and when it starts it should start from VM 100, VM 200, and VM 300. We have configured the following config:

PVE will start VMs in ascending start order and stop VMs in decending start order.

Start order=1 and startup delay=60 for VM100.
Start order=2 and startup delay=60 for VM200.
Start order=3 and startup delay=0 for VM300.

Then VM100 will start first and shotdown last. VM200 will be started 60 seconds later after VM100. VM300 will be started last, 60 seconds after VM200, so 120 seconds after VM100, and will be shutdown first.

 

[Ahmet Bas]

PVE will start VMs in ascending start order and stop VMs in decending start order.

Start order=1 and startup delay=60 for VM100.
Start order=2 and startup delay=60 for VM200.
Start order=3 and startup delay=0 for VM300.

Then VM100 will start first and shotdown last. VM200 will be started 60 seconds later after VM100. VM300 will be started last, 60 seconds after VM200, so 120 seconds after VM100, and will be shutdown first.

But VM 300 should be turned of first then VM 200 and VM 100 should be turned off last in order ? But if I change the "Start/Shutdown order: 1" will VM 100 not be turned off first due to the start/shutdown order?

 

[Dunuin]

N

But VM 300 should be turned of first then VM 200 and VM 100 should be turned off last in order ? But if I change the "Start/Shutdown order: 1" will VM 100 not be turned off first due to the start/shutdown order?

No, like I already said. Shutdown order is the reverse of the start order. So VM100 will start first but shutdown last and VM300 will shutdown first. und start last. Start order is "Start Order" from low to high. Shutdown order is "Start Order" from high to low.

 

[KubaMiszcz]

and i suppose if start/shutdown order is empty (any) it means '0', all of them starts first, then 1..2.. and so on?
or i need explicitly point order 1 and 2..3.. for the others if i want to run chain of VMs?

 

[leesteken]

and i suppose if start/shutdown order is empty (any) it means '0', all of them starts first, then 1..2.. and so on?
or i need explicitly point order 1 and 2..3.. for the others if i want to run chain of VMs?

Is not set, they start last and shutdown first. If you want a particular chain between certain VMs, number them explicitly (but that may not give enough time and you might need delay as well). All VMs with the same number (or no number) start and shut down simultaneously ((in batches of the number of workers).

 

[Dunuin]

If you don't set a start order for a VM it will be started last and be shut down first.

 

[joesroom]

If you don't set a start order for a VM it will be started last and be shut down first.

This has not been my experience. Been dealing with some extended power outages and when the host cluster comes back up the logs show several 'any' vm/ct starting before the ordered items, and many fail to boot.

 

[UdoB]

Been dealing with some extended power outages and when the host cluster comes back up the logs show several 'any' vm/ct starting before the ordered items

Any chance they were also HA enabled?

Please search for it. As far as I remember HA does NOT honor that manual startup sequence. (But starts all VMs as soon as possible...)

 

[joesroom]

Any chance they were also HA enabled?

Please search for it. As far as I remember HA does NOT honor that manual startup sequence. (But starts all VMs as soon as possible...)

I've only got two VMs HA enabled, and my #1 is one of them. I do see here that HA skips the boot order. Also, boot order is only enforceable per host... not cluster wide. That's unfortunate.

There are 5-6 non HA VMs that try to start before any HA machines. The first successful start seems to be my other HA item and it's a CT. Then a couple other CTs launch and then my #1 ordered HA VM. It looks like everything is trying to start before the hosts are 100% ready. Going to increase the start on boot delay and see if that helps.

Thanks for the tip about HA and ordered boot. I had missed that.